Skip to main content

tv   Full Board of Supervisors 92915  SFGTV  October 3, 2015 5:00pm-10:01pm PDT

5:00 pm
>> >> >> supervisor london breed: good afternoon, everyone. welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors meeting of september 29, 2015. madam clerk, please call the roll. city clerk: supervisor avalos, breed,
5:01 pm
present, christensen, cohen present, farrell present, kim present, mar present, tang present, supervisor yee, present. madam president you have a quorum. supervisor london breed: thank you. ladies and gentlemen please join us for the pledge of allegiance. >> thank you. madam clerk are there any communications. >> there are none to report today. madam president. >> please read today's consent agenda. city clerk: these items are
5:02 pm
considered routine. supervisor london breed: please call the roll. city clerk: on items 118, >>supervisor jane kim: >>supervisor eric mar: tang # >>supervisor katy tang: >>supervisor scott weiner: >>supervisor norman yee: >>supervisor john avalos: aye, supervisor london breed: aye, >>supervisor david campos: aye, >>supervisor julie christensen: aye, supervisors cohen aye, supervisor farrell, aye. there are level ayes. >>supervisor london breed: those items are passed. item 19. [administrative code - amendments to residential rent stabilization and arbitration ordinance] sponsors: kim, campos, mar and avalos ordinance amending the administrative code to: 1) prohibit, with certain exceptions, rent increases based on the addition of occupants even where a pre-existing rental agreement or lease permits such an increase; 2) prevent evictions based on the addition of occupants if the landlord has unreasonably refused the tenant's written request, including a refusal based on the amount
5:03 pm
of occupants allowed by the rental agreement or lease; 3) require landlords, after certain vacancies, to set the new base rent, for the next five years, as the lawful rent in effect at the time of the vacancy; 4) require that there be a substantial violation of a lawful obligation or covenant of tenancy as a basis for the recovery of possession; 5) require a landlord, prior to seeking recovery of possession, to provide tenants an opportunity to cure the unauthorized addition of the tenant's family members to the tenant's unit; 6) require that if a landlord seeks to recover possession based on a nuisance, substantial damage, or substantial interference with comfort, safety or enjoyment, the nuisance, substantial damage, or substantial interference be severe, continuing or recurring in nature; 7) prevent a landlord from seeking recovery of possession solely because the tenant is occupying a unit not authorized for residency; 8) require landlords to state in notices to vacate for certain good cause evictions the lawful rent for the unit at the time the notice is served; 9) require the rent board to prepare a form in english, chinese, spanish, vietnamese, tagalog, and russian stating that a notice to vacate may lead to a lawsuit to evict and stating that advice regarding notices to vacate is available from the rent board; 10) require landlords to attach a copy of the rent board form in the primary language of the tenant to each notice to vacate; and 11) require landlords to plead and prove in any action to recover possession that at least one of the grounds of administrative code, section 37.9(a)-(b) stated in the notice to vacate is the dominant motive for recovering possession. 1234 colleagues can we take this item same house. supervisor wiener >>supervisor scott weiner: we can separate the question the way we did it last time. so i would like to do that. supervisor london breed: okay. >>clerk, please madam president, it's my understanding that supervisor wiener would like to divide the question. >>supervisor scott weiner: i would like to duplicate the following and i would like to make the following
5:04 pm
motion. the motion for version no. 1 to remove page 8 line 9 through line 19 and version 2 to remove all language except for page 8 line nine, page 9, through line 19. to divide this ordinance into two ordinances. awe you will recall last week we passed the lion share of this ordinance unanimously including the ones that are the significant portions to the gotcha evictions and the moving evictions and we had a split vote on the rooming. this would divide this into 2 pieces of legislation. one the roommate provisions on the pages and lines i indicated and the other version will be everything else. presumably if the vote is the same,
5:05 pm
would it be 11-0 on one and 7-4 vote. if those votes were the same they will both pass. that is my motion to amend on those two duplicate or files. supervisor london breed: okay, supervisor wiener has made a motion. is there a second? supervisor tang, no discussion. >>supervisor jane kim: to clarify, the motion is to privilege any member on the floor. >> yes. >> what motion are we voting on? >>supervisor scott weiner: it would be the motion to amend them so the net effect would be that you have one version that is only the roommate provision and the other version would be everything else and it would be 2 pieces of legislation. >> okay, i just want to clarify for members of this board. in splitting these pieces we can put
5:06 pm
this provision at risk of not having a veto proof majority. so that wasn't the case when the question was divide but is now the case with two different ordinances. >>supervisor london breed: okay. at this time, madam clerk on the divided question, on the specific ordinance that was recommended for an amendment we are going to be voting on the ability to amend -- i'm sorry, the motion to amend. can you please call the roll on the motion to amend. >> on version one, we are removing page 8 line nine through page 8 through line 19. >> yes. you want to take the version 2 where we are striking all except page 8
5:07 pm
through line 19. >> one motion. city clerk: supervisor kim, supervisor cohen? >>supervisor malia cohen: to be maker, maybe you can talk about why you are doing this so everyone is on the same page because i felt like we dealt with it. walk us through it. >>supervisor scott weiner: absolutely. the overwhelming majority of this legislation, some people are opposed to a lot of portions of this, but in this body the overwhelming majority passed without any conflict. as stated the core pieces are the nuisance and gotcha provision and as well as the provision having to
5:08 pm
do with vacancy control and owner move in evictions and those are part of the 11-0 non-controversial. the items proven on this board which are controversial and has a fair amount of concern in general that we've heard has to do with the roommate provision that would effectively eliminate the ability of landlords to limit the number of residents in a unit based on numbers in the lease. so, given that divide, instead of sending this full thing forward together, it's either rise or fall together. it makes sense to send it separately and to ensure the non-controversial overwhelming majority moves forward and the mayor can sign or veto the roommate provision.
5:09 pm
that's the rational. you only have one section that is really controversial anymore and the idea is to separate it out. >> my question is why would we give the mayor that privilege to weigh in on the legislation when we have already discussed it? >> i don't view it as the mayor's privilege. i view it as a member of this board because i strongly support the overwhelming majority on this and i want to make sure that it's enacted and i don't support and others don't support. people can still vote to be whatever they want to vote for but this gives us the option to consider the roommate provision separately. >> thank you. supervisor london breed: supervisor campos. >>supervisor david campos: thank you. i will be voting against that effort. i think in any legislation we consider there are things we like and do not like about the legislation and
5:10 pm
we have to take the total of the legislation to decide on whether or not on balance to move it forward or not. so i will be voting against that and i hope my colleagues join on that. >>supervisor london breed: supervisor kim. >>supervisor jane kim: thanks, i agree with supervisor campos. i will be voting against the moment. i believe the ordinance should be moved together as 1 piece and be passed as one legislation that will be protecting tennants across the city. >>supervisor london breed: i see no other names on the roster. madam clerk, on the motion. supervisor cohen? >>supervisor malia cohen: forgive me madam clerk, i'm not sure on the exact procedure. i'm not quite ready to vote on this item. is there a way we can put this at the tail end of the agenda and deal with this later. i need more time to process this. >>supervisor london breed: yes, we'll come back to this item later on
5:11 pm
in the agenda. madam clerk please call item 20. city clerk: [accept and expend gift - estate of nguey woo - police department - $54,972.09] sponsor: mayor resolution authorizing the san francisco police department to accept and expend a donation of $54,972.09 pursuant to the order of final distribution of the estate of nguey woocity clerk: [accept and expend gift - estate of nguey woo - police department - $54,972.09] sponsor: mayor resolution authorizing the san francisco police department to accept and expend a donation of $54,972.09 pursuant to the order of final distribution of the estate of city clerk: [accept and expend gift - estate of nguey woo - police department - $54,972.09] sponsor: mayor resolution authorizing the san francisco police department to accept and expend a donation of $54,972.09 pursuant to the order of final distribution of the estate of nguey woo >>supervisor london breed: colleagues 1234 can we take this item same house same call? it will be taken without objection. item 22. city clerk: [multifamily housing revenue note - 491-31st avenue - not to exceed $16,227,000] sponsors: mayor; mar resolution authorizing the execution and delivery of a multifamily housing revenue note in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $16,227,000 for the purpose of providing financing for the acquisition and rehabilitation of a 75-unit multifamily rental housing project located at 491-31st avenue; approving the form of and authorizing the execution of a funding loan agreement providing the terms and conditions of the note and authorizing the execution and delivery thereof; approving the form of and authorizing the execution of a regulatory agreement and declaration of restrictive covenants; approving the forms of and authorizing
5:12 pm
the execution of certain loan documents; authorizing the collection of certain fees; ratifying and approving any action heretofore taken in connection with the note and the project, as defined herein; granting general authority to city officials to take actions necessary to implement this resolution; and related matters. city clerk: sf 221234 >> same house same call. without objection this item is adopted unanimously. madam clerk call items 22-35. city clerk: item 22-35. item 22, for 49 #-31 avenue. item 23, [multifamily housing revenue note - 345 arguello boulevard - not to exceed $18,047,000] sponsors: mayor; mar resolution authorizing the execution and delivery of a multifamily housing revenue note in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $18,047,000 for the purpose of providing financing for the acquisition and rehabilitation of a 69-unit multifamily rental housing project located at 345 arguello boulevard; approving the form of and authorizing the execution of a funding loan agreement providing the terms and conditions of the note and authorizing the execution and delivery thereof; approving the form of and authorizing the execution of a regulatory agreement and declaration of restrictive covenants; approving the forms of and authorizing the execution of certain loan documents; authorizing the collection of certain fees; ratifying and approving any action
5:13 pm
heretofore taken in connection with the note and the project, as defined herein; granting general authority to city officials to take actions necessary to implement this resolution; and related matters. 1234 item 24. [multifamily housing revenue note - 990 pacific avenue - not to exceed $38,633,000] sponsors: mayor; christensen resolution authorizing the execution and delivery of a multifamily housing revenue note in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $38,633,000 for the purpose of providing financing for the acquisition and rehabilitation of a 92-unit multifamily rental housing project located 990 pacific avenue; approving the form of and authorizing the execution of a funding loan agreement providing the terms and conditions of the note and authorizing the execution and delivery thereof; approving the form of and authorizing the execution of a regulatory agreement and declaration of restrictive covenants; approving the forms of and authorizing the execution of certain loan documents; authorizing the collection of certain fees; ratifying and approving any action heretofore taken in connection with the note and the project, a
5:14 pm
>> thank you madam clerk. colleagues, the mayor has asked for 1 week extension on this item. is there any member on the board who would like to continue this. motion by supervisor christensen, motion by supervisor farrell. can we take this motion to continue 1 week without objection? without objection the motion passes this item. this item will be continued 1 week until october 6, 2015, board meeting. madam clerk, please call item
5:15 pm
36. city clerk: [multifamily housing revenue bonds - 1035 folsom street and 21 columbia square street - not to exceed $16,000,000] sponsor: kim resolution declaring the intent of the city and county of san francisco (the "city") to reimburse certain expenditures from proceeds of future bonded indebtedness; authorizing the director of the mayor's office of housing and community development (the "director") to submit an application and related documents to the california debt limit allocation committee (cdlac) to permit the issuance of residential mortgage revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $16,000,000 for 1035 folsom street and 21 columbia square street; authorizing and directing the director to direct the controller's office to hold in trust an amount not to exceed $100,000 in accordance with cdlac procedures; authorizing the director to certify to cdlac that the city has on deposit the required amount; authorizing the director to pay an amount equal to such deposit to the state of california if the city fails to issue the residential mortgage revenue bonds; approving, for purposes of the internal revenue code of 1986, as amended, the issuance and sale of residential mortgage revenue bonds by the city in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $16,000,000; authorizing and directing the execution of any documents necessary to implement this resolution; and ratifying and approving any action heretofore taken in connection with the project, as defined herein, and the application, as defined herein. 1234 >>supervisor london breed: colleagues can we take this item same house same call? this item is proven unanimously. next item [public utilities commission new clean renewable energy bonds issuance - not to exceed $4,100,000] sponsor: breed resolution approving the issuance of not to exceed $4,100,000 aggregate principal amount of new clean renewable energy bonds to be issued by the city and
5:16 pm
county of san francisco, acting through the san francisco public utilities commission; approving the execution and delivery of an equipment lease/purchase agreement, a direct purchase agreement, and a filing agent agreement; and authorizing related actions, as defined herein. >>supervisor london breed: same house same call? without objection this ordinance is passed unanimously on the first reading. city clerk: [settlement of lawsuit - mountain cascade, inc. - $3,200,000] ordinance authorizing settlement of the lawsuit filed by mountain cascade, inc., against the city and county of san francisco for $3,200,000; the lawsuit was filed on june 11, 2013, in san mateo county superior court, master file no. civ 519255, entitled in re: mountain cascade contract litigation, related to the public utilities commission's construction of the bay division pipeline no. 5 - peninsula reaches project. (city attorney)1234 supervisor london breed: same house same call. this matter is approved without objection. item 39 [planning code - inclusionary housing requirements in the eastern neighborhoods] sponsor: kim ordinance amending the planning code to eliminate the rental incentive from the eastern neighborhood urban mixed use districts that permits project sponsors to lower their inclusionary affordable housing requirements and applicable eastern neighborhood public benefit fee by agreeing to maintain the units in their market rate development as rental units for 30 years; and affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act, and making findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101.1. 1234 supervisor london breed: supervisor kim? >>supervisor jane kim: thank
5:17 pm
you, colleagues. before you today is an amendment to change a part of the planning code that reflect a different housing market than the one we had today. since 2009, this city has offered and incentive to project sponsors in the eastern neighborhood area in the urban mixed use district. to encourage rental unions, this amendment was passed in 2009 to reduce obligation of developers. when this amendment was passed it represented all eastern units in the residential. now it represents 84%. the dramatic increase in the delivery of rental units is not the result of this incentive, but after very strong rental market san francisco has seen. this amendment before us today is updating the planning code to to remove this incentive because we are building rental house without it and building in the current housing market.
5:18 pm
i appreciate your support and glad to see this amendment was recommended for approval. >>supervisor london breed: thank you. colleagues, can we take this item same house same call. without objection this item is approved. city clerk: [public works code - public right-of-way occupancy fee exemption] sponsor: campos ordinance amending the public works code to provide that floodwater management projects that are located within public rights of way, requiring a minor encroachment permit, and funded by san francisco public utilities commission grant funds, are exempt from payment of public right-of-way occupancy assessment fees. 1234 supervisor london breed: supervisor campos? >>supervisor david campos: thank you, the amendment before you will help small businesses and property owners in flood prone areas. it will help them make changes to the property to help prevent flooding. it amends the code so if a property owner is doing a flood water
5:19 pm
management project funded by the san francisco public utilities commission grant funds they will not be charged a public right-of-way occupancy fee should they encroach into the sidewalk. on march 19th, i held a hearing on the issue of flooding at the intersection of folsom which is the lowest point in the city which is in my district. it is an area that has the worst flooding of any part of the city. puc, staff, local residents, business owners created a working group for ideas to deal with this problem. one of the ideas is the amendment of this code so that those who wanted to address this issue did not have to pay fees on top of that. so, the point here is it will
5:20 pm
make it easy for tennants to apply for flood assistance and will incentivize the flood water program to prevent damage to their property in the event of a storm and this will help to ease the administrative burden on puc and staff when participating in the program when they are hit with unreasonable fees that the puc has had to deal with in the past and the past puc has had to intervene on behalf of these folks. i want to thank the puc and the staff for working on this item as well as the department of public works and my aid. thank you for all the work that
5:21 pm
has gone into it. i respectfully ask for your support, thank you. can we take this item same house same call? >> this item is approved. >> can we discuss the same item. >>supervisor scott weiner: i withdraw the motion from the file to the original version we voted on last week. i want to request that we separate the questions in the same manner that we did last week voting on the roommate provisions separately from the rest but still be all one file. i will say that i do believe in
5:22 pm
flexibility and adding roommates and being able to swap a roommate when a roommate leaves. i would support one non-family member. people have a reason to do that whether it's a boyfriend or girlfriend. that's fine with me. i just think this current provision goes too far in terms of a large number of people wanting to be added without any consent from the owner and i will be voting against that separated part of the file. >>supervisor london breed: okay, colleagues on the ordinance without the roommate provision, can we take that item same house same call? without objection the ordinance finally passes unanimously. madam clerk, can you please call the roll on the remaining question of the roommates provision of the ordinance. city clerk: on the balance of
5:23 pm
the ordinance? >> yes. city clerk: madam president, your first vote was the severed portion pages 8 line -- >>supervisor london breed: actually no. that was withdrawn by supervisor wiener. we are looking at the ordinance similar to what we did last week when we separated out the component of the ordinance that were supported by all members of the board and more specifically the component of the ordinance. supervisor wiener do you have the section of the area we are talking about? >>supervisor scott weiner: point of information. my understanding is that we just unanimously voted to adopt the ordinance minus the roommate question and we'll vote separately which is for clarification page 8 line nine through page nine line 19. >> that is what we are voting onto the voters provision for the
5:24 pm
roommate. seeing no other names on the roster, madam clerk, please call the roll. city clerk mar, wiener no, avalos, aye, breed aye, campos, aye, christensen, aye, supervisor cohen, aye, supervisor farrell, no, there are 7 ayes and 4 no with supervisors tang, yee, farrell on the dissent. >>supervisor london breed: the ordinance is finally passed. madam clerk can we go with commendation given by supervisor mar? >>supervisor eric mar: >>supervisor eric mar: thank you. i would like to ask legal
5:25 pm
outreach to come forward. i'm honored today to recognize an amazing organization, asian pacific legal outreach. we are here with one of it's founders taylor who has led so much that i will talk about in a moment different movements for social justice and empowerment not just for asians and pacific islanders communities but all asians. i think it represents client and communities not only immigrants but citizens and youth and the types of legal services they have been able to develop have been tremendously except based on grass routines and organizing advocates within our community and grass roots approach to the most vulnerable in our communities. they are expanded beyond japantown
5:26 pm
operation of law students that founded it in 1975 to a wide range of different movements they support across the different communities and neighborhood lines. since '75 they have been able to break down legal barriers. the clients are marginalized based on low income status, gender, age, ethnicity, race, nationality or language. the parts they serve are strictly in need of services they provide. i want to also say they provide services in a number of languages not only cantonese and hindi, tagalog, taiwanese
5:27 pm
and spanish. it's a multilingual service they have created. i want to give a shout out to director taylor. he didn't want know do this. i'm doing this against his wishes. a san francisco neighborhood legal assistance foundation supervising attorney, he worked with many others to found the association legal outreach. i was his law clerk years and years ago. they really worked to empower japanese americans and asian pacific islanders from their work from retrust reparation and the cases for the japanese american community to freeing the racial justice campaign years ago but also today they are linked with broad social justice movements like human trafficking. they have led the creation of
5:28 pm
new alliances against domestic violence, not only in san francisco but also the oakland battered women's clinics and other organizations as well. tremendous alliance building and coalition building. largely because the dean and the staff have worked to build broader movements. in the past 40 years, taylor, suzuki, the first staffer they build it into an amazing organization to work across so many different lines. i wanted to say too that their elder abuse project and the youth violence prevention program are a great model in san francisco as well. lastly a couple of notable accomplishments, they have been honored by other groups. i did want to acknowledge social services. there are projects dealing with abuse and elders and seniors in our community and to promote
5:29 pm
their independence and aging in place with dignity in our communities. they also have as i mentioned work not only in domestic violence but also developing new projects to support lgbt survivors of domestic violence as well. but really cutting edge in the types of legal work they do that is empowering to people. i wanted to say that my experience helped guide as an activist and social justice person and that they don't get enough credit in the work they do and how much they have changed the lives of youth and people like me, i want to thank dean and his staff and the board and all of those that have supported and empowered and given a voice
5:30 pm
to over the years. before dean makes some comments supervisor jane also wanted to give some props to them as well. >>supervisor jane kim: i just want to say a few words to this legal outreach. it's been an amazing 40 years. i think supervisor mar said it all but many people don't realize that it is the largest services for victims of domestic violence in the bay area serving multiple language groups and not just the leadership but the amazing staff with over 22 attorneys coming out of law school education providing front line services for residents across the bay area that would normally
5:31 pm
not get the caliber of this legal services. i will just recognize a few because we know them here victor huang who is our deputy director and price who is also our immigrant commissioner and i know many of your attorneys worked with us also have passed legislation due to the work that api legal outreach does throughout the city. i think it speaks highland -- highly to the dedication of the team and staff and works on the field to serve on these front line services. it's developing the leaders and the pipelines for our asian american communities and communities of color. i would like to thank api for
5:32 pm
my office, ivy lee who has done in credible work and api legal outreach not only provides the service to the most vulnerable in our community but the people of today and tomorrow and public servants of today and tomorrow in the bay area and that is why this is so important. we look forward to the gala on friday. the academy of sciences and we hope that many people come out to support and look forward to another 40 years of these incredibly vital services but also continue to go develop the pipeline services in the asian american community. >> thank you so much, supervisor mar for your kind remarks and supervisor kim for your kind remarks. you know, it's difficult for me
5:33 pm
to come and admit how old i am and thank you for reminding me how ancient we are becoming. but, also it's difficult for our organization to be recognized in public. it's not something that we do. it's not what we are about. thank you for this recognition and honor. we have partnered with you supervisors and a city as a whole in providing services to those folks who don't of a voice today whether they be seniors or youth, tenants, recent immigrants, survivors of violence. communities of color. we will continue do that with your support. i want to just thank you on behalf of our staff. our staff does all the work. i just kind of make public appearances. it's our staff that should be recognized today and we thank you all again for your support. [ applause ]
5:34 pm
supervisor london breed: thank you and congratulations. the final commendation will come from me. it's a surprise commendation. it's in regard to a really pressing issue facing the western addition community today. more specifically right now longstanding affordable housing developments that are in jeopardy of losing their affordable housing
5:35 pm
status in the western edition community is one such issue. one affordable housing site, the frederick douglas housing was built in the 70s and they recently paid off their mortgage making them vulnerable to developers in agreed. i have been working with the mayor's office to work with a plan for this affordable housing and meeting in washington and our congress nancy pelosi to approve this garden. in the next month i will be working to improve affordable housing. as the city moves forward to addressing san francisco's housing crisis,
5:36 pm
we need leaders to work with us. i have a surprise commendation for such leader. reverend brown. i would like to recognize him for leader in all of san francisco. he was instrumental in creating frederick douglas gardens for our community and he also sounded the alarm when frederick douglas housing was being sold. and his support for affordable housing and his advocacy and our first african american board of supervisors president who is in the audience today,
5:37 pm
doris ward. [ applause ] trail blazers who have paved the way to make sure that those who are need are taken care of and are supported by the powers of this city. the baptist church is led by amos brown and he is leading this by the plague that affects our city. before i bring reverend brown up, the grandson of frederick douglas who is the pastor of first friendship baptist church in dallas,{this text is a rough draft format. communication access realtime translation (cart) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a verbatim record of the proceedings.}1234
5:38 pm
texas. his grandfather was instrumental in not only purchases the lot where douglas gardens -- sits but he was the first african american to run for board of supervisors. dr. cane the third can you please come forward and say something about reverend amos brown. [ applause ] [ cheers and applause ] >> thank you very much. let me thank you, president london breed for the wonderful leadership that you continue to model not only in san francisco but around this nation. i'm preaching to dallas texas and whenever you want to speak on that, i brag that
5:39 pm
i'm from san francisco and san francisco made sure there was a leader of london breed competence and charisma is giving leadership to this board. thank you very much for your sterling leadership and never forgetting where you have come from as it relates to our community and how the fact that our community and the welfare of our community and a real sense says a lot about san francisco as a whole. so being in dallas, i'm always proud to point to san francisco as a city of progress, a city that cares. so i hope and pray that we will hold on to that because as far as i'm concerned, san francisco is ground zero when it comes to addressing income inequality in these yet to be united states of america. so san francisco if it is to live up to its lofty of aggressive city it
5:40 pm
must seek responsibility to fight for the middle class, to fight for vis a vis because it's all of those who are the most vulnerable. we can shout about google and we are glad about thatcious , but my -- thing is if we could not google those and those that do not have the opportunity, we live beneath that. my grandfather, frederick douglas senior was the first african american to run for the board of supervisors here in san francisco. and so i am so proud of the fact that dr. amos c brown took that baton of progressive and prophetic
5:41 pm
leadership and with the pride of the witness of amos brown to leading the fight to ensure that we have affordable housing right here in san francisco, california. i join with you in saluting and appreciateively applauding dr. amos c brown, you about i say this to you, let's not just talk about it. let's be about it. let's not just talk the talk. let's walk the walk. the best way to salute dr. amos c brown. is to recognize the national board member of the naacp, the leadership of the san francisco branch of the naacp. one of the most clear prophetic voices in this world is dr. amos brown, if we are going to shown of dr. amos
5:42 pm
c brown let's do that in san francisco so i can go to dallas to say as we go as a model to ensure that america is one of liberty and justice for all. i salute you for having the sense to salute dr. amos brown. if you have enough sense let's take it from hallelujah! about what he's doing to do you lulia. congratulations, dr. amos c brown. [ cheers and applause ]
5:43 pm
>>supervisor london breed: supervisor cohen? >>supervisor malia cohen: thank you. good afternoon. it's a pleasure to be here and hear president call dr. amos brown. even he sat up in his seat with pride. i'm not sure what we can expect here. it looks like we might have a church service. we have handful of ministers in the audience today. first i want to take a moment to also recognize the ever so lovely talented beautiful courageous doris ward for whom all of us stand on her shoulders. thank you for loving us and guiding us and giving us the inspiration and reminding people that we do have a place in this city. thank you very much. and the other thing that i wanted to just acknowledge is to reverend brown who has been a leader for generations, for many people in this city, he's been
5:44 pm
outstanding. the one thing that i admire most about this man is that he's never run from a fight. this is a man even when the odds were stacked up against him he stood up in the face of adversity here and in the south. reverend brown, i hope that you will continue to work with president breed and myself not only on affordable housing but unsolved crimes and murders. and also foster peace for the mothers and families who have lost dear loved ones and make sure we do not brush over lightly the light of this very precious life w that, i welcome you to come up to the board, thank you. thank you. [ applause ]
5:45 pm
>> madam president, supervisor malia cohen, to all of you who comprise the legislative body of our government. good afternoon. this is one time that i am speechless. [ laughter ] i said it in an earlier meeting at 5 years ago unfortunately. i suffered an ischemic stroke.
5:46 pm
the one thing that i always marvel about since that day is that god as you will recognize spared my mouth and my mind. my mobility was just compromised a bit. i will submit to you before i take my seat that i'm not here alone today. that it's very much a touching moment, a tender moment when our son in the ministry, the reverend dr. frederick douglas hanes the third. the grandson of my predecessor
5:47 pm
spoke before the podium and gave some words of commendation. san francisco should be proud of him. he is a world, a global citizen. he's in demand all around this globe and behalf of not just civil rights, one would take advocacy only for blacks. dr. hanes is a champion for human rights. respecting the worth and dignity of all human beings. whether it be gay rights, women's rights, workers rights, you make -- name it. this brother has been morally consistent and i say today though i
5:48 pm
accept this surprise citation that i wish my wife to come and share, that it can be a do alulia. not just a hallelujah!. it will be a do alulia when we stop this hemorrhaging this atrocity of black americans, that the report that will come out in the chronicles that the median income for african americans is $29,000. but for whites, it's between $101-110,000 a year. shame shame shame on san
5:49 pm
francisco. it's a shame on san francisco that every week i have been presiding practically over funerals of young african americans who are dead before their deadline. the bible promises us 70 or 80 years if by reason of strength, but too many of our young people are dead at the ages of 15-35. that is a blight on san francisco. [ applause ] just the other day his holiness was here in this country. and he spoke to the legislative chamber of our national government. and the one thing that he under scored among many other great things he said, was that we should all just live the golden rule.
5:50 pm
do unto others as you would have them do unto you. if you don't want to be out of a house, don't let african americans be out of a house and experience no affordable housing in this city. if you don't want to have that he would, make sure that you have healthcare for african americans and culturally sensitive doctors. if you don't want anybody shooting in your community, make sure that you have police personnel that knows how to really provide public safety for all of the people of this city. [ applause ] and when we do that, as i always say, we will never apologize about san francisco or who we are as decent human beings, but we will all feel good and proud about ourselves and be able to say, i'm black and i'm proud. i'm brown and i'm sound.
5:51 pm
i'm yellow and mellow and i had red and i ain't dead. i'm white and i'm all right. i gay but i'm great. that's what san francisco is. god bless you and thank you. [ applause ]
5:52 pm
>>supervisor london breed: all right. now that we had church at the board of supervisors. we can get back to business. madam clerk, can we please go to roll call for introductions. city clerk: to introduce new business is supervisor kim? >>supervisor jane kim: thank you madam clerk, i have two items today. the first is a resolution. erlg -- earlier this month members of the house
5:53 pm
tried to defy planned parenthood, one of the largest providers of family care and family planning services. over the last five 5 years they have cut 10% of federal budget for family planning and it's been eliminating family planning funds. this is unidentical to society that serves women. i would like to thank supervisor camps and yee. to help support the -- to allow to control a woman's body. this is critical the ability to affording women to store in their lives and granting unmarried access to the
5:54 pm
pill at ages 17 instead of 21 to employment, increase their earning power and narrow the gender gap in pay and later contributing to more enduring marriages. contemporary studies indicate that teen pregnancy interferes with a young woman's ability to graduate from high school and enroll and graduate from college. conversely planning delays and spacing birth appear to have helped women achieve career goals. delaying a birth can also reduce a gap in pay that typically exist in working mothers and reduce the chance of needing public assistance. the fact is when women have better control of their bodies they have better control of their lives and a stronger society for it. a health concern is important as well and for the nations largest providers
5:55 pm
in healthcare including cancer screening, prenatal test and women's health services. in a case with roe versus wade that would support planned parenthood, oppose any defunding of planned parenthood of any level and the san francisco -- regardless of federal support. second, today i am calling for a hearing and actually substituting and augmentment a hearing called by john avalos in the spring of this year. for most people tickets or tow away are a financial hassle. i have myself
5:56 pm
been ticketed and tow aways, while my budget has enable to pay for this, many people living paycheck to paycheck can have far more consequences. in june when san francisco discussed this issue with sf mta and discussed further discussion prior to approving a new contract to begin in april 2016. if san francisco was on par with other cities, i would no question the cost for recovery fees that have been associated. but the fees our office have researched are considerably lower than other cities. for example we looked at chicago, seattle, los angeles and new york. in chicago a tow away fee is $150 plus
5:57 pm
$20 for the night. seattle $114 and additional fee per day. los angeles $120 and additional fees. new york city $185 per tow plus $20 per fee. no additional fees. here in san francisco, our base tow fee is $491.75 more than double of any of these large cities. plus $68.25 per night. more than 3 times any of these cities. including we are one of the cities that also can charge additional fees on top of these charges. while i understand that sf mta has to recover from these cost i would question why
5:58 pm
these fees are higher and private contractors are structured to ensure cost recovery only. if a number of tows per month does not cover rent and staff, what does it cover for monthly fees. when fees exceed the staff, what happens to that additional revenue, who gets to see it and how much does a tow away allow to incur. i'm glad that san francisco is waving the fees for stolen vehicles, but it maybe one's meal budget, a significant portion of your rent and any part of living expenses. currently we have no program to help anyone with this fee similar to parking
5:59 pm
tickets. we also do not have a cap on towing prices. while my roll call vote focuses on today's fees and sf mta will be exploring i'm also concerned about our municipal fines and what programs cannot afford these find and how much should balance our books on the backs of residents. i'm joining with supervisor john avalos who made this request on this past spring on drivers license suspension. organizations such as poverty center, aclu, lawyers for civil rights and department of justice are examining this now and what is the
6:00 pm
purpose and how does it impact communities across the country. in one data has surfaced as much as 60%. and ferguson the department of justice found a pattern and practice of racial discrimination. with every police, municipal court, city hall participated in unlawful targeting of african american residents leading to millions of dollars in fines and fees by african american residents to satisfy revenue needs rather than public safety needs initially for which these funds were created. there are lives ruins because of lives they can afford to pay. a one woman could not afford a $41 ticket and was put on a
6:01 pm
plan to incur $30 a month to incur the ticket. after 1 year she had not paid off this $41. there was a working class man who stole one can of beer and was thrown in jail because he could not afford the ticket associated with it. there was a mother who is taken away here drivers license. when she was unable to pay the fine she was sent to 2 years probation which cost her an additional $200 to participate in the program. while these are not necessarily classes in san francisco. san francisco should be ahead of curve in examining this issue. while our fees make-up a percentage of revenue, unbalanced with it's original purpose whether it's increasing public safety, ensuring adequate street
6:02 pm
cleaning, all legitimate public goals. we should examine the desperate impact it has on our residents based on income and how we can provide relief to residents who cannot afford these fines and fines can lead to devastating financial and criminal consequences and finally lowering san francisco fines for all residents. i look forward to this hearing and i want to thank supervisor avalos for his office on the work intially already and the rest i submit. >> thank you. it's not after 3:00 p.m.. we will return to the new business after the 3:00 p.m. special orders. >> madam clerk, can you call items 49-52. city clerk: special orders.
6:03 pm
[public hearing - appeal of tentative map - 40 bernal heights boulevard] hearing of persons interested in or objecting to the decision of public works dated august 24, 2015, approving a proposed four-lot subdivision located at 40 bernal heights boulevard, assessor's block no. 5640, lot no. 010; and making environmental findings under the california environmental quality act. (district 9) (appellant: betsy brown and chris witteman, on behalf of bernal/powhattan neighbors) (filed september 3, 2015). (clerk of the board)1234 >>supervisor john avalos: thank you. i would like to continue this item and hope to resolve the appeal that is before us. the mediation is scheduled for october 13th so there can be a resolution, i hereby move these items to october 20, 2015. >>supervisor london breed:
6:04 pm
supervisor avalos has moved to move these items to october 20th. are there any members of the public who would like to provide public comment on the continuance. seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues can we take the motion to continue the meeting of october 20th, without objection. without objection the motion passes. >>supervisor london breed: madam clerk can we go to our special order item 41-44. [public hearing - appeal of final negative declaration - recology landfill disposal agreement - hay road landfill in solano county] hearing of persons interested in or objecting to the adoption of a final negative declaration under the california environmental quality act for a proposed agreement for disposal of municipal solid waste at recology hay road landfill in solano county, issued by the planning
6:05 pm
commission on may 21, 2015, and adopted on june 1, 2015. (appellant: joshua n. levine, on behalf of solano county orderly growth committee) (filed june 30, 2015). (clerk of the board) [affirming the approval of a final negative declaration - recology landfill disposal agreement - hay road landfill in solano county] motion affirming the approval by the planning commission of a final negative declaration under the california environmental quality act for the proposed agreement for disposal of municipal solid waste at recology hay road landfill in solano county. (clerk of the board)1234 [reversing the approval of a final negative declaration - recology landfill disposal agreement - hay road landfill in solano county] motion reversing the approval by the planning commission of a final negative declaration under the california environmental quality act for the proposed agreement for disposal of municipal solid waste at recology hay road landfill in solano county. (clerk (clerk of the board)1234 sf 431234 sf[preparation of findings to reverse the approval of a final negative declaration - recology landfill disposal agreement - hay road landfill in solano county] motion directing the clerk of the board to prepare findings reversing the planning commission's approval of a final negative declaration under the california environmental quality act for the proposed agreement for disposal of municipal solid waste at recology hay road landfill in solano county. (clerk of the1234 1234 >>supervisor london breed: we will consider the following. up to 10 minutes to speak for the appeal. up to 10 minutes for representative of the planning department to present it's analysis of certifying the negative d.c. largs. up to 10 minutes for real party interest to present their case
6:06 pm
for certification of the negative declaration and up to 2 minutes for public commenters to speak in support of the issuance of the negative declaration. finally, the appellant will have up to 3 minutes for rebuttal argument. so with that we will open up the hearings to move forward with the appellant. you will have ten minutes. 10 minutes. >> thank you, madam president and board of supervisors. i want to support supervisor kim. i am a supporter of planned parenthood and for a number of years. i would like to thank this board for what you have done for the clinic on valencia
6:07 pm
street. it's remarkable your support. so the matter at hand. my name is dwayne crown, former solano board of supervisors. we are the appellant of the landfill decisions to not do an environmental analysis of the proposal to ship the garbage that is going into sooner or -- solano county. i find it difficult to understand that a county that is doing so well with social justice issues has a blind eye to not see they are shipping 50 trucks to solano county. they all go to
6:08 pm
contra costa county. that delta is a fair number, but it's not roughly the 60 miles each way into solano county all of which is new to solano county. to say there is no environmental impact is mind boggling to me. as a representative of solano county, i hope you will reconsider the decision made by the planning commission and the planning staff to not do full environmental analysis. incredibly i find they didn't even find a mitigated negative declaration that someone in contra cost a county and alameda county with making new trips. they would at least consider what are the impacts in the region that these trucks are now going to. you are silent on that.
6:09 pm
absolutely silent. i would hope that you would reconsider. >> good afternoon. i represent the solano county community. thank you for the opportunity to speak. we are lucky to have the best environmental review. the greatest thing about ceqa is that you have these levels once you have identified the project. you can do the bare minimum and say there is nothing happening here and you can bring it up and do a negative declaration or environmental review. our issue is taking issue with a negative declaration for many many reasons. first of all, this is not the delta between what is happening and what is going to happen. this is between 640,000
6:10 pm
additional miles per year that we are going to be driving these trucks. additionally there is a huge fair argument based on the amount and testimony and expert report coming back on both sides that requires additional review. so the other thing is we are only looking at the project as this contract. that's not what it is. the project is that disposable of solid waste. that's up to 5 million tons of waste. this piece mealing is not only unlawful under sea equal but has been happening throughout the entire process. right now we have this issue of what is actually going to be deposed of at the hayward landfill. some say it a certain amount of tonnage and certain capped and the recent response to our appeal that it could be up to 94 trucks per day. that's round trip truck loads. so 60 trucks
6:11 pm
per day versus 94. additionally the hayward landfill can only accept 4600 tons of waste per day. if we have up to 94 trucks, basically san francisco would be taking up the capacity per day. we haven't talked about what's going to happen if we go over that and we don't know where they are going to store it. additionally all the neighborhoods that surround this landfill use that landfill. it was there for all the other communities to bring their waste to. thus san francisco starts trucking thousands of miles to take their msw to the hayward landfill, at what point does their own community does not truck their items there. people will move their trash around and
6:12 pm
the landfill has a certain capacity to 2050. if we are increasing the amount of solid waste that goes in there, they are going to reach that capacity much sooner and thus everybody is going to be looking for their trash. the recology wants you to review this. that is huge. they have concluded the project relies on data that isn't there. for example we have the appeal that you have not taken into account that san francisco's population is steadily increasing. thus if a population increases, of course waste increases, of all types, municipal and solid waste. they want us to believe that waste is going down. but if you look necessity past 4 years it's leveled off
6:13 pm
or slightly increasing. this is data coming from the landfills. these are raw numbers which is in congruent with the data to say it's going down. for efs they attach, they grant application that you have been given a grant. kudos, we all want less waste. we want more programs and that sounds great in theory, but what an environmental needs to review is assess those numbers. if we are going to assess those are are they going to be flementd. -- implemented and how much are we going to be able to divert and how much does it compare to san francisco's rising population. there is a lot of data not taken into account and the reason is because this is a negative
6:14 pm
declaration. all we are asking is you have to take it to another review. there are significant impacts on the environment. there are completely fair arguments that is completely understandable that that is happening. to basically ignore every other experts ignore that don't fulfill what you want to hear is a problem. all we are saying is please take another look at this. people are there to protect the people and not only who i represent solano county residents but everyone. you have thousands of miles of trash and that is what we call piece mealing under ceqa. i think it's unlawful and dangerous. i speak on both sides of law for this. i typically municipalities. i look at review and say what is the
6:15 pm
standard we need here. i would say that a negative declaration is small. if you want to flat line and possibly change a zoning ordinance that doesn't have an impact. this is not one of those. [inaudible] implication of a review but you have to protect the people. that's why the ceqa law is there and that's what we are asking to you do. thank you. >>supervisor london breed: thank you. okay. we will now open it up to public commenters who would like to speak in support of the appeal. you have up to 2 minutes each.
6:16 pm
public speaker: madam president and board, my name is finestein. from the sierra club. nice to see you all again. we sent the letter expressing that you really do need to do a full eir. the examples presented to you make it very clear that it's appropriate for this. there are several issues for the sierra club. one which is not a negative declaration issue that landfills do have impact. they take open space and destroy resource and we asked for mitigation for that. we got mitigation at the landfill where there is a fee for open space as well as recycling which san francisco benefits from. the new landfill that recology is proposing to you will not have
6:17 pm
such a fee so we will not be mitigating the loss for the resources at this landfill. i would like to emphasize so it could strike home to san franciscans that we are not just proposing a large amount of truck traffic along the west contra costa, west alameda corridor which is usually a berkeley community that are disadvantaged low income communities. we are going to be inflicting a great degree on those pollution areas where we have the highest asthma rate in the city because of those highways, 101 and 280. now we are putting more trucks right next to communities similar to the bayview and we are saying there is no impact. there has been no study on that. i think it's unconscionable for san francisco not to look at that.
6:18 pm
public speaker: we have to ask with all the facts you heard, was there any science done ? there was no evidence of that. then how was that done? when we are in the back end with all the garbage on tunnel in san francisco. there was no environmental review done when that project was built. we have done this for over 50 years. the mayor and board of
6:19 pm
supervisors has done to try to mitigate the negative impact that we suffer there. what's going on now. we have a negative declaration about recology adding another 13500 feet to the transfer station and now they want another issued for this landfill. it doesn't make sense and leadership demands on your part, fairness and integrity. that's all we are asking to you show us. just show us some fairness integrity. do the eir. reverse this vote. >> thank you, next speaker, please. public speaker: good afternoon, i'm a san francisco resident and ratepayer. i'm here in support. we need an environmental impact report to dispose of our garbage
6:20 pm
responsibly. this is paramount, this is san francisco, we are a green city. how do we do it? i have been involved with this issue for 5 years. first it was the landfill and now we are going to try to ship it again without an environmental impact report. why are we doing this is this ? this is irresponsible. landfills should be a thing of the pass. europe is ahead with a mass -- please think about it. we should be working on a mass incinerator plan. i would ask you to reverse this and -- review this. public speaker: i'm a san
6:21 pm
francisco resident also. i have a question, how many board of supervisors have visited these two landfills , the one in solano county. i'm concerned what landfill is closer to people to maybe agricultural land and i wonder about the water table. i think that's significant. it was in the wheat land one 24 124 feet from the surface. i would like to see an eir. thank you very much. >>supervisor london breed: thank you. next speaker. public speaker: i live in the neighborhood nearby. it happens that i happened to put on my
6:22 pm
hiking shoes coming here. i don't know if it's appropriate for the tenderloin because stuff gets stuck on the bottom. nonetheless i'm going with the sierra club today. i find it telling it that it impression would be pointed out that not requiring a report is illegal. but that was insufficient. they had to give other reasons than that, normally being illegal is a pretty strong argument. in this board it doesn't always carry. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> my name is david chan. an acronym stands for sustainability, parks, recycling and defense fund. first of all i have been involved with this struggle for 30 years. we urge you to uphold the appeal in solano county and require an environmental
6:23 pm
impact report. i have prepared a one page document which i have provided cops for members of the board of supervisors. i would divide it into two parts. one is highlighting what is an environmental benefit now in the existing agreement which is bolded on your piece of paper. it's basically open space fees already over 10 $10 million have been expended to acquire more biodiverse in the wild life corridors between mount diablo in alameda county. that's beneficial to san francisco residents. but these areas are to san francisco. the rest is in the mountain view. it's not an environmental benefit. the second is jobs in environmental education fund.
6:24 pm
$400,000 to $500,000 a year has been expended. i don't know the details on that finally they are under the agreement, there are two things. when this deal was made in 1998 as the result of a settlements of a lawsuit which in san francisco that it did not have one that it will have one and it ruled out the implication of this waste. thanks to the neoliberal judges, that's no longer operative law. finally there is a community monitored community which i serve. >> thank you very much. i'm sorry, everyone gets the same amount of time. i'm sorry. next speaker.
6:25 pm
>> having these have got to avenue -- have an impact. healthy communities and stretch this as far as we have a dumping and when we have a fire, how far does smoke goes. we need to be a little bit more integrated. we are looking for a health equilibrium. and let's go in favor of the progress and diversity for our community.
6:26 pm
i need the rethink. thank you. >> madam president. i represent san francisco. we agree that doing an eir makes a lot of sense. the reason is there is not enough science supporting the final decision made here. science would help us get to the bottom of the solution and it may not turnout. trucks may use more gasoline and spew greater emissions overall despite the lower mileage going up there. so there is issues like that that we are concerned about that. we are also concerned that the two stakeholders in this debate have done everything they can to get vovltd -- involved in the political process and we are concerned that we do not
6:27 pm
have objective scientific information to make this decision for the city. >> thank you, next speaker, please. public speaker: good afternoon, peter. also known as cactus pete. i have more than one trick. the bad guys call me a prick. this is a serious issue but i see so many people here an probably as frustrated as i have been. it seems like the political process doesn't work for us. i have to share that the reason that we have not been able to be there with a people group with king and demandey and caesar chavez did to shut you all down to working with common sense is because there has been over 100 patented mind control programs which allows
6:28 pm
for freedom and speech and free will as long as we don't do what steven and gandhi did. i came back from bakersfield, long beach and all of los angeles, i handed about 2,000 of these flyers. that i did a rope a dope with the pope and i don't prove with your pump among and muhammad alley and we walk into the promise line. and so the power is to know that we are going to get off the fence, stop paying our mortgages and rent starting
6:29 pm
today and we heard about carlos santana and his album and we are going to look at each other in the eye and say we are going to hold on to property taxes and we are looking to politicians and working. >> thank you. your time is up. at this time we will have up to 10 minutes from representative. sorry. public speaker: steve zelcher united workers for action. why hasn't there been an environmental study? well, i think it's because of the role of recology. recology supports a lot of the politicians on this board in this city and they don't want an environmental study. with the effect of more trucks on the streets that the highways need for people and
6:30 pm
particularly people of color who live in poor communities. i'm also objecting to supporting this appeal because there have been a series of incidents in recology. recology has covered them up and refused to take action of racism in this country. they refuse to report to the city and county of san francisco. new incidents although they are required to under the new contract. who gets away with this who gets away with the contract in city of san francisco and retaliates against an african american worker. who is this company and why are the board of supervisors saying their not required to run an
6:31 pm
environmental review. are you being run by this recology. who do you represent the working people of san francisco or another being affected by recology. thank you. >> madam president, i will remind the members of the audience that you are allowed to use silent fingers but no vocal expression. >> thank you. public speaker: i am actually a recology worker. i am the person who september -- sent you all supervisors an e-mail explaining the issues happening at the recology and the retaliation that has happened. as a result of me basically reporting the nuisance incident. i sent it out to the mayor, sent it out to you all. i have heard back a from a
6:32 pm
couple, malia cohen and sent at the mail back stating that they had a lawyers number which i don't know why that was even given. whatever. the company really is full of bs as far as i'm concerned and i feel like basically they need to do some sort of environmentalist study of what they have going on. i also want to point out that i don't have to take a look further with things happening with the racial issues. there was another employee who came out recently who is a driver speaking out against a supervisor at the company who is racist. so i don't know what the franchise agreement is. i would assume that they need to report issues of race or issues of nuisance to you all to the city or whom
6:33 pm
ever else. i would like something to be done. i know it's transporting garbage down the highway. i don't think you would like to have it shutdown and have it backed up on your freeways. the people may decide they want to do something. i would hope you will do something. if not, it's on you all and it will be in your hands. >>supervisor london breed: thumb. -- thank you very much. are there any other members who would like to speak in support of the appeal.
6:34 pm
>> next speaker, please. this is about the appeal. thank you. next speaker, please. ma'am, would you like to comment in support of the appeal? >> okay. we are waiting. we apologize. we have an interpreter. we have to wait until they are able to provide interpretation. they left? okay.
6:35 pm
so we are going to need to take a recess until we can find and interpreter. >> maybe i will speak in simple english. >> before we get started i need to bring the meeting back from recess. excuse me, ma'am, are you going to interpret for her? public speaker: i complain about recology. the flies come in my
6:36 pm
house and sometimes i smell bad and sometimes i smell something burning. it makes me feel just like i live besides a garbage can. sometimes i find a mouse in my house. it's getting worse and worse. i can't stand it. it's really bad. i wish recology can move far away. >> thank you very much. are there any other members of the public? >> good afternoon. how are you? my name is eva. i live there for over 25 years. i moved here in 1990 little hollywood. it
6:37 pm
really beautiful. only list for the vacation. 10 years ago. everyday. why not the owner has a few -- [inaudible] in -- one more
6:38 pm
time. [ indiscernible ] >>
6:39 pm
>>supervisor london breed: stick to the subject matter if you are going to speak. public speaker: i don't know how to make money for the stock market and cannot support somebody to be -- and i cannot. >>supervisor london breed: you can't speak about any public campaign related matter. >> back to the sidewalk. please understand.
6:40 pm
6:41 pm
6:42 pm
6:43 pm
6:44 pm
6:45 pm
6:46 pm
6:47 pm
6:48 pm
6:49 pm
6:50 pm
6:51 pm
6:52 pm
6:53 pm
6:54 pm
6:55 pm
6:56 pm
6:57 pm
6:58 pm
6:59 pm
7:00 pm
7:01 pm
7:02 pm
7:03 pm
7:04 pm
7:05 pm
7:06 pm
7:07 pm
7:08 pm
7:09 pm
7:10 pm
7:11 pm
7:12 pm
7:13 pm
7:14 pm
7:15 pm
7:16 pm
7:17 pm
7:18 pm
7:19 pm
7:20 pm
7:21 pm
7:22 pm
7:23 pm
7:24 pm
7:25 pm
7:26 pm
7:27 pm
7:28 pm
7:29 pm
7:30 pm
7:31 pm
7:32 pm
7:33 pm
7:34 pm
7:35 pm
7:36 pm
7:37 pm
7:38 pm
7:39 pm
7:40 pm
7:41 pm
7:42 pm
7:43 pm
7:44 pm
test >> >> >> city of san francisco >> >> >> board of supervisors >> please stand by... >> >> city of san francisco
7:45 pm
>> >> board of supervisors >> >> >> please stand by... >> >>ey we would appreciated more. a couple of points. the mention about two elephants in the room. i represent the solano county committee. we have worked long and hard to protect solano county. i don't care if it's waste management. the only elephant in the room is the waste industry. that's one giant elephant. solano county has been trampled by that elephant. we have been supporting this
7:46 pm
implementation and one of your board of supervisors has worked to invalidate and to imply that we are in some fashion weighing against each other i resent. in trade i'm a cpa. c pa's learn very early that you can not audit yourself. you have an analysis work done by san francisco. it's it independent study. you look at your own work, oh, we've done a fine job. you cannot dut your work and review your own work. you have never had a project. you would not accept that, do eir work for your own commercial developers. while you do your own eir for your own project balance of me.
7:47 pm
i'm going to turn it over to our attorney. >> i'm going to speak fast about a few viewpoints that were made. when you talk about an environmental review, it was done. you go down and check boxes. when those checks end up in the wrong boxes maybe you will look into something a little bit more. to say it was fair, it was a little bit misleading. this is not complicated. this is a bunch of trucks going way farther than they need to be without looking at what's going to happen when you look at that waste at that landfill. what's going to happen when you increase the tonnage beyond that landfill. we are relying on several future praments -- programs to expect to go down in municipal ways. of course i want everyone to have better disbursal. it's not used in science. so me some numbers on how that
7:48 pm
actually affects the bottom line. no one disputes the fact that you are using environmental analysis about the transfer statement that they are going to need it and this is part of it. i understand there is environmental review. >>supervisor london breed: thank you, your rebuttal time is ended. thank you very much. this hearing has been held and is now closed. this matter is in the hands of the board of supervisors. colleagues, any comments or questions. supervisor wiener? >>supervisor scott weiner: thank you, madam president and thank you to all the members of the public on both sides that came here today. i think it was a helpful discussion, but in the end, i don't think there is a ceqa issue here. i think that this negative declaration was appropriately issue. i don't think that additional environmental review is warranted and i think fundamentally this debate is really about the merits of the issue not about ceqa and
7:49 pm
so i will move that we reject this appeal specifically that we move item 42 and table items 43 and 44. >>supervisor london breed: supervisor wiener has made a motion to approve 42 and table 43 and 44. madam clerk, please call the roll. city clerk: supervisor kim, aye, supervisor mar, aye, supervisor tang, aye, wiener aye, yee, aye, supervisor avalos, aye, supervisor breed, aye, campos, aye, christensen, aye,
7:50 pm
farrell aye. >>supervisor london breed: the mitigated negative declaration has been approved. next special order. city clerk: a special order approving a tentative map for a lot and condominium for the project and make environmental findings of ceqa. item 46 is the motion to approve the decision and approve the tentative map item 47 is a motion to disapprove the public works disapproving the tentative map and item 48, preparation of findings related to the tentative map. >>supervisor london breed: members of the public, we have more business to conduct. can you please exit quietly. >> colleagues this is an appeal for the project. for this hearing we will consider whether the tentative
7:51 pm
map aforesaid project is consistent with the general plan for any specific plan that applies. without objection we will proceed as follows: up to ten 10 minutes for the appellants to describe their appeal, up to 10 minutes for support of the appeal, and ten 10 minutes for the department of public works for the planning commission department of the approved maps and the parties to represent and 2 minutes for public commenters to speak in support and finally the appellant will have up to three 3 minutes for a rebuttal. without objection this hearing is opened and that's how we will proceed. first up is the appellant. you have ten minutes. 10 minutes. >> good evening, supervisors, i'm diane carpal oi z map coalition.
7:52 pm
sorry for the late submissions of all the issues. it's quite complegz and i did my best to reconcile prior to this hearing. first i would like to start off with the agenda. it's got three motions there. that should be corrected. it only addresses four of the blocks and lots associated with the three tentative maps that have been conditionally approved by the planning department. so, if you wouldn't mind looking at the three motions that can be made at the end of the presentation that would be great. i would like to request additional time. there were three projects, almost
7:53 pm
60 blocks and lots at issue. and, lots of paperwork and applications. i'm guessing that's not going to be allowed. the information provided, inadequacy for approvals and community benefits. questions about project ownership and tax liability as an item. so, on august 24, 2015.
7:54 pm
residents at merced received a notice identifying. can i have an overhead please. almost 60 blocks and lots, hundreds of addresses and three projects tied to the conditional approval. there are several inconsistencies with this notice. it says it is an approval of the subdivision maps, it says down here it's a tentative approval and it's an approval on the tentative maps. now, technicalities are boring and tedious and i understand that, but it's garbage in garbage out an these items need to be addressed before we can even understand what we are appealing.
7:55 pm
so, we have communication from project sponsors from their tentative maps and communication from department of public works and tentative from frank lee that they said they have not received the final map yet when we picked it up from city hall on september 21, one of the pdf files, three of them were actually application for final checklist maps. we are getting a lot of conflicting information and confusion from the city and from the bare minimum notice basically when resident side received this notice they didn't know they were going to be impacted.
7:56 pm
it's an enigma in itself. it's 52 acres. started out as 200, they are using the name park merced and technically the state owns some and they didn't know the feedback we are getting. 800 summit. it looks like the notice didn't go to them. i'm not sure the due process was in noticing happened accurately. the other, there are questions with due process. we are not going to focus on that. we basically want to focus on the points that this notice in and of itself is erroneous and not clear and doesn't serve as a notice to people living in and around the area. this did not accompany any map.
7:57 pm
this project is associated with a map. this area is highlighted and there is a duplicate block listed. so if this block is supposed to be something else, which i believe it should be probably i'm assuming here, i haven't heard anything different or but 7235 is not their property, but 7325 so it may. that warrant clarification. a ton of information to review. we have been given ten calendar days to appeal where the city allows up to 10 business days to provide information on information request and going off simply this notice is unreasonable and inadequate especially for three
7:58 pm
projects. so, when we did request the tentative maps they were sent on monday the links to the maps and those we had to register to the website to get it. these actually don't even give a clear understanding of what we are looking at. but we have development block one with 4 blocks listed, block tentative map with 1 block listed and 21-22 with 7 blocks listed. so this is essentially three development blocks in one.
7:59 pm
and 21 s has not been identified. even so we requested them and we got those. so with asked for, we did appeal based on there is zero information provided that people didn't know. they were panicking. and we had a lot of questions. we received the dpw work order these are labeled, the final map which lays a confusing element, a further confusing element to this process. in the order regulations signed in march 24th, this year to replace old regulations, we haven't
8:00 pm
reconciled what's been changed and what not. there is no tentative final map. there is a tentative map and processes related to that. there is a processing map and a final map, final checklist map and final processes and milestones that must be met in relationship to that. there is no at the present time tive final map. this is a great concern. i only have a minute 1/2 left and the thing i really want to emphasize is that there were, the letters submitted into this board of supervisors that no final checklist map has been submitted, it actually has been submitted. it was received by news our record request on september 21st. there are several questions related to that as well.
8:01 pm
so shall -- here we go. it's really not enough time to go through everyone i submitted 11 page brief trying get everything that i have caught thus far, but it's really no public hearing was provided prior to conditioning the conditional approval. so the public had no input related to any of this. so you have to not approve this. you must deny this conditional approval. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor yee, you have questions? >>supervisor norman yee: yes, this was approved before i got into
8:02 pm
office. i respect the residents of the apartment long fight in this development. i appreciate the thoughtful and well research brief they submit to support their appeal. i also completely understand the feeling of worry and uncertainty that residents feel before a construction phase. i have a few questions for the department of public works. >> would you like to wait until they finish their presentation? >> i think this is related to the statements? >> okay. >> can you describe the noticing procedures for the subdivision required by law? >> good afternoon, supervisors, bruce dorse city and county surveyor.
8:03 pm
i'm going to let him respond to your questions. >> good afternoon, supervisors. paul naebing public works. in response to your question we have promulgated a subdivision code and regulations that specify that consistent with state law. we noticed all resident side within 300 feet of a subject property. we required the property to show a map what are that boundary line would be n this case, we decided that since the project does have such a large impact for the development agreement even though there was not sort of the state requirements to notice as many people as we did, we did notice all the residents for the development area out of an abundance for caution. >> in your notice, why was
8:04 pm
there discrepancy between the assessors parcel number in the ones noticed in the subdivision sn i'mly -- similarly out of an abundance of caution, it only covers 4 blocks however the cities conditions of approval, there are many other streets as part of our requirement to approve in this city map. those are listed in conditions of approval, all of those blocks that we have listed are affected by this approval. that's why they were included. >> in regards to supporting documents, how were they made available to the public when they are not included in the mail and public notices? >> on our notice we state that the public can contact us. they are available for pick up at 1155
8:05 pm
market street third floor at our office or we do attempt to make them available via e-mail where the lot size is larger we do a mail receipt for provided on an ftp site on the internet. >> thank you. there was an you should of the property owners site that sort of changed hand. when was the last change and what are the requirements around notices are for such a change oh for this basically a different owner? >> yeah, that is a contention raised by the appellate. we will verify ownership prior to approval any final map, but at the time of tentative application, we ask the applicant to sign a statement basically under perjury they do have an interest in the property their
8:06 pm
asking to subdivide and that suffice our condition to get the title and guarantee. >> also the appellant sort of noticed that there were some back taxes owed in one of subdivisions 186001. >> i can't speak to back taxes, we require proof of payment and that would be something we would address in the future. >> is that part of park merced at all? >> i haven't verified this myself, but i heard that is owned by the san francisco state university and not part of this development. >> thank you.
8:07 pm
>>supervisor london breed: thank you, with that, we will open this item up to public comment for those who support the appellant. mr. yip? public speaker: the item for the side. i don't know what we are talking about. i support that anyhow. but if i have a chance for public comment -- >> no, mr. yip. okay, next speaker, please. >> i live near this apartment. this year i have had a chance to we knew it was supposed to be a freeway. it's evident, it's more cars and they come close during high morning
8:08 pm
and evening hours. it's impossible. current planning and construction with more high rises. with people with the cars. these people in the high rises don't give access to the bart station, not to the cal trains. they will use cars and it will again be more cars. there is very high pricing in san francisco. you can see the prices. the prices will never go down.
8:09 pm
there is enough globalization in san francisco. the streets in san francisco -- by car. that will happen if you continue to approve high rises in san francisco. thank you for your attention. >>supervisor london breed: thank you. next speaker, please. >> yes, my name is jarrod faulkner. i'm not for this appeal, but i can tell you about merced. the management is horrible. they have shown so much bad faith and so many hands it's a joke. i was part of the residents associations of the merced coalition. as a result of the activities at the park merced management. they got to an individual, daniel flichs phillips who was dead
8:10 pm
now. he sent is us as the membership committee and through us out and if anyone of us tried to go there we would be arrested fortress pass many we took the letters we got from him and had the rest of the board sign for impeachment under roberts rules of order. we have a terrible rodent problem. it's to bring the garbage to central locations. the rodent problem has exploded. we had a big problem in our place and the next door neighbors did too. it was one problem after
8:11 pm
another. they did everything they could. frankly an investigation by this board would be very good as to the tactic that we used. it's very reminiscent of the work we have done and the struggles by the race itself. in this case it's an economic situation rather than a racial situation. thank you. >>supervisor london breed: thank you, next speaker, please. public speaker: hi. i am a long term park resident. i received that little map in my mail. it showed the surveyors names. all the residents didn't know what streets that they went to. i feel i'm very worried about what's happening and it seems that things are given to us quickly, ambiguous
8:12 pm
and unclear. a lot of residents are worried. i wonder why there is such lack of clarity in the notices special lau if they are going to charge in our community. there is 3- 4 construction sites happen. it's a very large piece of land. it's just very confusing to the residents. i would like to request more information for the residents. we did get for example in april a newsletter and they said that's when they were going to do the phases and later they said they were going to go, muni was going through -- but then it didn't happen so we weren't noticed that this wasn't happening. so when we get these newsletters, it doesn't seem like solid
8:13 pm
information. it changes. anyway, i would just like to have a little more clarity in the notices since it affects us all deeply. i'm just questioning why is there such am ambiguous information. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> hello supervisors. my name is glen rodgers. i want to mention that behaviors similar to this by the city was recognized by the north beach neighbors. they were shocked to learn of a contract to tear up columbus street for the roadway and this was signed years earlier with no public disclosure. this led to the plan when it was brought to the board of supervisors. behavior like this, including
8:14 pm
secrecy, violation of due process in consistency between notice and maps inadequacy of documentation of approval. questions about ownership and lastly tax liability lapses should not be rewarded. thank you. >>supervisor london breed: thank you, are there any other members of the public who would like to speak to the appeal? seeing none, public comment for that component of this hearing is now closed. and we will have up to ten minutes for 10 ten 10 minutes for the representative of department of public works and planning commission to describe the issuance of the map. >> madam president, supervisors.
8:15 pm
i will be brief. to follow up on the questions that you raised i would like to clarify for the board that the map has controls that we follow at the department of public works. the appellant raised quite a few legitimate issues, however, the department's response to those comes in the conditions of approval that we have issued and for instance, the issue about ownership, that is something that we will verify. it is a conditional of approval for this map. questions about taxes, same thing. so in some cases, these are real, they are good questions, but they will be addressed in the future. another, the question about the at the present time tive -- tentative map and final map process and the term final map mean as opposed to
8:16 pm
tentative map. those are terms that we require the appellant to use to be very clear that this is a tentative final map as opposed to a tentative parcel map which is easier and generally easier to get approved. this is the highest level of scrutiny for our department. the confusion over noticing, that is a bit confusing and again that was done out of an abundance of caution to make sure that any resident who might have an interest in this map could contact us to request additional information or to appeal that to this board. so, because of the development agreement that this first phase of maps is processed under covered the entire merced park area we include any of these areas that might touch the blocks
8:17 pm
in this noticing requirement and to all the residents in the park. to my knowledge this is the largest notice circulation of notice that the department has ever done. other than that this map was processed per our usually and conforms with our state law and local municipal codes. >>supervisor london breed: supervisor wiener, you had a question? >> >>supervisor scott weiner: yes, for the department of public works. as i understand this is a first of series of division maps that will be issued with respect to the project? >> that's correct, supervisor. this is the first of many possible subdivision maps per the development agreement. however the developer has no obligation to apply for future subdivision maps. >> in one or more of those, the dimension of streets is covered
8:18 pm
by a subdivision, map, eventually; is that right ? >> in our conditions of approval we have specified the developer will need additional street improvement plans which have not been approved complying with the development agreement and that covers streets. >> that will be pulled into a subdivision map? >> the subdivision map only covers the right-of-way. it doesn't get into specificity about the street. >> it will cover the subdivision map? >> that's correct. >> does this subdivision map cover street width? >> yes. >> today? >> yes, sir. >> what are the widths. that was not my understanding. what is the width covered by the streets? >> i don't have the map in
8:19 pm
front of me. i think it's over 100 feet wide and other streets are more like 60 feet wide. >> i'm talking about more of the neighborhood streets within the development. as you know and i have had disagreements with your department about for example on the hunters point shipyard and candlestick project where the department of public works had streets that were dangerous because they were so wide and we had traffic. i want to make sure we are not having the same situation on merced. my understanding that that issue was not before us in the current subdivision maps? >> i believe your concerns are delayed in that we issued a conditional condition of approval that
8:20 pm
would require in particular mta and planning department and dpa. we are going to need basically a unanimous consent on the issues. >> i'm still a little confused then. in terms of the streets running through the projects, how many are included in the subdivision map before us today? >> the streets adjacent to the subdivisions are shown. for instance between blocks 20 and 21, there is boulevard, that's shown in its entirety. there is a number of other streets in improvement, community benefits that will be required to be shown on future or current. >> i'm talking about street widths? >> the street widths where they are shown they have a dimension. >> so as of this subdivision map if it's approved today will log in
8:21 pm
the street widths for the project? >> they would need to be in substantial conformity with this map. >> that's not what the department informed us. we asked for the appeal because we have a potential dispute with the fire department and department of public works about the widths of the streets because we had been informed that there was another push yet again to have extra wide streets that are not conducive to safe residential use. so i'm sort of concerned that after we were informed of that by the department that you are now saying the streets are part of this. i don't know. >> i think maybe the misunderstanding is the overall street right-of-way. that's pretty much final. however the allocation of that use of that various street width, the travel way or
8:22 pm
pedestrian friendly zones, is the question that is being worked out right now on the business improvement plan. >> so in terms of how wide the curb to curb that's not before us today? >> no, sir. >> so in terms of whether it's going to be 26-foot clear or 20-foot clear on the parking subjects that's not before us today? >> that is not part of the subdivision maps. >> will it be part of the future maps? >> that will part of the process that is being circulated to the planning department and to all the other concerned agencies and getting consensus that this is the correct use of the public space. >> that final decision would that be folded into a final map nor project? >> it would be folding into a future board action to accept the
8:23 pm
built out public streets. >> for the board of supervisors? >> yes. >> because in the project it was folded into the subdivision map. >> i don't want to be labor the point but it was on the overall street right-of-way and that was not an issue here to my understanding. >> in terms of the over all allocation to street versus sidewalk, in terms of whether we are going to have sort of wide raceway streets or residential streets that will be based on board of supervisors approval? >> yes. that will come to be on the department and public improvement agreement. >> and we have the option to reject it at that time? >> presumably so.
8:24 pm
>> we have the power to do that and that's not before us today? >> no, sir. >> thank you very much. >>supervisor london breed: okay. at this time seeing no other names on the roster. we will have up to ten 10 minutes for the real party interest to present. >> good evening, president breed and supervisors. i'm jay abrams from the law office. i would respectfully request that you -- reject the provisions here because what is connected to the appeal because of the department 's desire to over notice to more residents which was not
8:25 pm
required by law. we thought it it was appropriate thing to do as background this board approved the project in 20 11. there was a development agreement at that time. the merits of the project were gated debated. -- after they filed litigation challenging the city's certification of the eir. that was litigated in superior court where they lost in appellate court where they lost and california supreme court where they lost again. so the merits of this project have been discussed and debated quite significantly. what we are here tonight is the subphases 1a and 1b. related to those subphase
8:26 pm
approvals. the maps are conditional approvals. there are about three hidden -- 300 conditions before approval. that will come for you for approval. there will be supervisor wiener asked, there will be future maps coming before you for future subcases of the project. we submitted a letter responding to the appellants claims and i just want to reiterate the notice requirements per state and local law that the noises -- notices are sent to property owners. what dpw did was sent the notices to all residents within 300 feet. >>supervisor london breed: i'm going to
8:27 pm
pause your time. supervisor wiener has a question. >>supervisor scott weiner: you just referenced my colloquy, do you agree with their assess ment. my understanding that it's appealable before the board of supervisors in terms of the curb and how much is allocated as opposed to the people. >> i believe that he is correct. however, by the time it reaches you all, there is going to be several rounds. street improvement permits that will have been reviewed by the various agencies. currently we are preparing 95% version of the plans. we are responding to those comments now ernest. in some instances the comments are not consistent with each other. we are doing our best the help of dpw which has been fantastic in trying to resolve the conflict among those comments and right now we are working
8:28 pm
on the plan to be submitted to the city within a few weeks that will then be provided to the committee again. by that time it will be three or four times. i believe it's confirmed, but i believe the public improvement agreement can be approved or disapproved. it can be by dpw. >> that is not before us today? >> no. >> and when it does come before us we can accept it or reject it? >> that's correct. also to clarify his comments which was correctly stated which is what's being shown in these maps is the area of the total streets, the area dedicated to sidewalks, bike lanes, automobile listens. that's what determines. these maps don't determine any of that. >> okay, we are going to start your time again.
8:29 pm
>> okay, thanks. the second point to make that all the related to the project related to the two first subphases of the project which is something to do which is the map of the totality of the project. finally i want to address the chain of title issues prior to the agreement of title 11 project sponsor were required to review and since then there is a legal requirement that tefrt city transfers the city is notified. that's happened and that's been fully addressed with the city. finally i just want to note that this is a large project. there is a project sponsor that has a great responsibility to inform
8:30 pm
the residents with what's happening with the project. given the size of the project this is a challenge concerning whether or not to provide too much information, a little bit of information here and there. what we have been doing is submitting resident newsletters on a quality bases that are very detailed and shows the scale and the project and the various approvals that are happening. there is also a map that shows the areas of subareas 1a and 1b. there has been quite an amount of information explaining the project and what's happening with it. i just want to make it clear that we've been taking that very seriously. so we are here for questions. thank you very much.
8:31 pm
breed >>supervisor london breed: okay, with that, supervisor yee, do you have any questions in >>supervisor norman yee: yes. this subdivision starts really impact is those that will be moving first or possibly moving first and the question i have is what are you doing specifically to those residents that might be relocated in this first phase of your development? >> good afternoon, supervisor yee and supervisors and president breed, staff mall on with project sponsor. what we have in addition to resident newsletters, we had the ability for the residents to be relocated. that meeting on september 9th where we invited all of them to walk
8:32 pm
with us through the project and procedures and to the relocation plan and how it would impact them. our relocation map will enable us to construct new homes. our main offer is to construct the new homes. >> and if it goes when would the resident have to give you notice that they want to move into new places? >> the notice provision are redetails in the development agreement with the relocation plan. our noticing to the residents the meeting we held to talk to the place many noticed before to be placed residents are in 2b. that meeting had to take place
8:33 pm
before any building permits were submitted. the next notice is within 60 days of start of construction of the building that we'll house to be relocated residents. we have to let them know when construction will start on their home and we anticipate construction to take an x period of time and we'll give them notice at that time. within the expected 6 months prior to completion of that building, residents will be noticed again and there are a series of notices that will happen. it's no greater than 1 year and no less than 6 months prior to the completion of that building. it allows them to tour the building and rank their choice of home by unit type. each resident is able to select
8:34 pm
a unit type and we'll show the homes that match the money -- minimum or greater corresponding size. there is a first notice, a second notice and ultimately a decision is required before they move to relocate. they do have the option to elect to move. they also have the option to stay in their home and take relocation assistance as designated by the rent board. >> so when is the last moment when they can decide whether they want to move or not? >> the last time, after, technically if they want their preferred unit. it's within that second notices
8:35 pm
provision up to that point. however if they change their mind at the last minute and i want to move and i don't want to move off sight, i want to stay, then they will be given one that is still available and they will buyback with seniority. in talking to residents, it seems what's unfair or unknown, they don't know what to expect when construction starts happening. can you describe what's going to happen? >> we all know construction can be disrupted. we never tell anyone to the contrary. our goal is to work with contractors that we have worked with impact on noise, dust control, air monitoring systems. there will be noise. i will not tell anyone there is not going to be noise. construction is a
8:36 pm
noisy and dusty process. we'll do our best to mitigate and control that and address concerns as much as possible. >> what will be the process or procedure if residents have some specific issues of our own construction. who will they go to and who can they actually launch the complaint. >> there is various ways. we have a direct website. info parks and vision.com and we have a phone number for that access. residents contact us through that all the time and we respond to that directly. parks and recreation and services department also have the ability to contact people. they have the same access through portals and web mail and addresses also. >>supervisor london breed: thank you,
8:37 pm
supervisor yee. at this time we will open it up for public comment for those who want to speak in support of the rio part and interest. if you have a public comment please come forward. you have two minutes each. >> hello. i have been in support of this project since it started. i have lived here for 12 years. they have been very good about notices and i have come here to talk in favor of it.
8:38 pm
i'm not confused. recently i got a really well informed. i was well inform frd from what i received from them. it will be affected by all the noise and trucks and everything. so when i got this letter to say that there is another appeal, i was >> looking forward to an apartment. and i heard about all of these issues and this is where i would be
8:39 pm
living if this can go forward. please. i'm appealing to you to let this go forward. >> san francisco department of public works and i have been listening to the appellant and department residents and you understand where there are real issues they will be dealt with down the road, with the classification of ownership. where there are issues otherwise they seem to result instead instead either from legal language to obscure as much as it clarifies and from a tendency to over notice rather than to over notice so there was not a failure to notice. it was adequate in itself. we ask you to approve it. there are a few of us in the audience i would ask you to understand of the building trade. we continue our support for the project. >> thank you, next speaker,
8:40 pm
please. >> good evening, supervisors brook turner, executive director for better housing coalition. thank you, we appreciate your interest and your discussion of it. we want to applaud our colleagues in the rental housing industry of park merced to establish new homes of san franciscans and badly needed new homes and we'll continue to work with them to make sure that the needs of the community and the city and tennants are addressed as we know they will be. we respectfully request that you affirm the approval, the tentative subdivision map. thank you. >>supervisor london breed: thank you, is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. now the appellant will have up to three 3 minutes for a rebuttal.
8:41 pm
>> thank you. we heard a lot about having the notices accurate but actually we don't know what this is for, if it's for condos, the fact that they were building condos for sale was not in the newsletter. any kind of subdivision, if it's residential they have to notice. the fact that they are saying they went above and beyond is not true. they barely met state requirements for governmental codes. the entire. the final checklist and map has been submitted. so, i'm not sure here is a letter saying please accept this final map and checklist.
8:42 pm
this is in january 29th. dpw did not hold a public hearing for people to address concerns there. i agree with that lady. i don't want to deal with another appeal. i don't know the to deal with city hall. i would like an informational meeting so we can tackle issues prior to them being approved and ultimately appealed and not everybody is going to be happy, but let's try get this, include people so that there is a clear understanding about how we are going to move forward. another issue is that there is 400 vacant units at park merced right now and there is an affordable housing crisis. so, they are not being forthright about that or they are actually contributing about having the rental rate way too high for what the apartments are. finally i included in
8:43 pm
the attachment a reconciliation of who was noticed and what the deed says and what the blocks and properties are at issue on this hearing. i want you to focus on the subdivision map approval of three maps which notice went out erroneously. there are issues. it seems back wards to be able to provide proof of ownership after the city does this work. it does not make sense to me as well as making sure the taxes are paid. on that issue. i did go back and review after jim ab rams letter was received that they did owe $76,000 on it. it is the city's responsibility. this item highlighted in red are notices that didn't
8:44 pm
go out. they were not included in the notices. the yellow are the development blocks. >> thank you, ma'am. thank you very much. >>supervisor london breed: this hearing has been held and is now closed. this item is in the hands of the board of supervisors for items no. 46, 47, 48. supervisor yee in >>supervisor norman yee: thank you, president breed. colleagues as i said at the beginning of the project. the project is not what is in front of the board today. what is in front of us is a subdivision map appeal. and my conclusion is i do not feel that the appellant have shown enough evidence to over turn the department of public works decision. colleagues i motion to move forward no. 46
8:45 pm
and table items no. 47, 48. >> supervisor yee has made a motion to support item 46, table 47 and 48. >>supervisor scott weiner: i will be supporting it. with the information from the colleague in terms of department of public works, with the issue of street clearance is a very important one. it does ultimately feed into the final map. i don't know, it seems a little bit unclear right now whether it's going to come to the board onnor -- or not in terms of our discretion to approve. we've heard some concerning things about the decisions that the department has taken in terms of wanting wider streedz -- streets and streets that are less safe but that does not
8:46 pm
appear to be before us today. my understanding that the current property line width in this map are the same within the development agreement and today we are not making any decisions with this appeal about street versus sidewalks in terms of whether sidewalks are starting to shape back to have wider streets. so that is an issue i'm going to be very carefully monitoring because this is a major development with the city, a new neighborhood effectively, a significantly revised and expanded neighborhood and it's important we get it right in terms of design. but as far as this appeal, i will be supporting to reject it. >>supervisor london breed: thank you, supervisor cohen? cohen cone thank
8:47 pm
>>supervisor malia cohen: thank you very much. i will be supporting this project. in district 4 and 5. it's nice to share that responsibility with the west side. >>supervisor london breed: >>clerk, please call the roll. city clerk: supervisor kim, aye, supervisor mar, aye, supervisor tang, aye, supervisor wiener, aye, supervisor yee, aye, supervisor avalos, aye, supervisor breed, aye, supervisor campos, aye, supervisor christensen, aye, supervisor cohen, aye, supervisor farrell. aye. there are 11 ayes. >>supervisor london breed: the tentative map is finally affirmed unanimously. madam clerk, can we go to the next item on our agenda. city clerk: we were in the middle of new business. we will begin
8:48 pm
with supervisor mar. >>supervisor eric mar: thank you, as people exit the chambers, let me say that san francisco has the best music festival. it's the bluegrass festival. i wanted to say thanks so much to warren hell man and the hell man family in district one. it immaterial -- impacts my district. we expect hundreds of thousands of people to come in and enjoy the park. hopefully it's a beautiful we can't saturday and sunday october 3rd and 4. it's in hell man hollow and
8:49 pm
meadows as well. it's really thanks to 14 years of a vision of warren hell man to bring such incredible musicians to our city. it's internationally renown bluegrass, rock n roll, alternative, post punk bands and this year's lineup as a small taste of what's coming up, bob skaggs, welch, steve earl, paul from the jam, joe jackson, little feet, michael fram ton, loss lobos and tremendous lineup this year. for more information go to www. hardly strictly bluegrass.com. also
8:50 pm
when john paul jones from led zeppelin appeared and bob of the grateful dead appearances, we are always looking for incredible surprise performances and i'm always looking for turner klondike and if residents have immediate concerns about blocked drive ways, increased traffic and lack of public traption, they can call the harvick bluegrass community hotline. 415, 702-6727. or my office. the hotline becomes operational friday october 2nd. i hope to see everyone out there friday through sunday at the harley strictly
8:51 pm
bluegrass festival. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor mar, supervisor wiener. >>supervisor scott weiner: thank you, colleagues today i'm introducing legislation to reform and restructure the committee that deals with street closures in san francisco. this committee which is currently basically interest departmental committee without community representation plays an important role in terms of short-term closures or block parties or street festivals as well as more permit closures such as the pavement to parks program. it's important that this body be expanded to go beyond city departments and also to include representative of the public who are knowledgeable in areas of whether it's pedestrian access, entertainment and so forth. so the legislation will
8:52 pm
formalize which right now operates in a very informal manner without clear rules without consistently applied rules and will formalize which department will have votes and department representative and right now departments will send people who are not even familiar with what is before the body. and will provide four appointments for the board of supervisors for the community representation. the legislation will also require that hearings be properly noticed and sometimes they don't even vote. they will just kill a project without casting any votes. they will be required to issue and annual report including information about the number of applications and number of
8:53 pm
applications approved or denied. and will also require to develop a survey requesting applicants requesting anonymous feedback. a number of space projects in terms of the parks will continue to be permitted byes scott and the project must be preapproved by the department and mca in letterhead by the chief from the department and department of transportation and is scott will hear prior to issuance of any permits. we need to have a body over seeing those events that are actually up to the task and the rest i submit. >>supervisor london breed: thank you, supervisor wiener, supervisor
8:54 pm
yee. >>supervisor norman yee: i submit. >> supervisor avalos? >>supervisor john avalos: tomorrow i will be going to washington d.c. to meet with hud and the federal financing agency and we are also taking part in an event with mooup municipal leaders and senate leaders across the country as part of a homeowners day of action in washington d.c.. tomorrow's goal for me will be to talk to hud and fannie may and freddie mac leaders asking them that here in san francisco we passed a resolution, here at the board of supervisors and several mayor's at the conference of mayor's here in the city passed a resolution as well urging hud and fannie may
8:55 pm
and freddie mac to sell loans not wall street where they sell to wall street investors who just take those mortgages and they make money off them but don't put any conditions on how those mortgages will be kept in the hand of working people especially latinos and african americans across the country that have been hit by the down turn in our economy and that's across the country. so i'm actually reexcited about the opportunity. i think here in san francisco as we have heard today from reverend brown as to the economic conditions that we find ourselves in. i have worked diligently to tree to see what we can do to help.
8:56 pm
i have put in the trust fund that is supposed to create programs from the mayor's of housing to be able to support homeowners and there is such indifference in that department that we have not been able to see anything come forward that has enabled people to keep their homes and wealth and their families and it's keeping latinos and african americans from living in this city in san francisco. even with our economy booming we don't have that experience of being able to maintain or maximizing our wealth. hopefully hoping to get a good response from fannie may or freddie mac. if we are not able to sell to wall street and financial institution we have
8:57 pm
organizations that will work towards achieving principal reduction for homeowners, helping homeowners to have a property they are able to pay for with a better mortgage with a lower interest rate and the goal is to make sure working people can hold their wealth in their homes and households to be able to support a middle class that can actually grow across the country and here in san francisco. the rest i will submit. >> thank you, supervisor avalos. supervisor breed? >>supervisor london breed: thank you, colleagues. i have one in memorial for tracy dyson, born on september 21, 1968, and passed away september 20, 2015. she was a graduate from balboa high school and attended contra costa college where she study social work. she dedicated her time to work
8:58 pm
with social services. she suffered from lupus and multi-sclerosis. she was extremely talented in home decorating and it was her hobby. she constantly watched hgtv and her family she would have been seriously involved in design were it not for her illness. she is survived by her two sons, anthony 24 and aaron 17. she was an amazing mother and friend to all who knew her and she will be missed by her family and loved ones. the rest i submit. >> thank you. supervisor campos. >>supervisor david campos: i have a few items. the first item is a follow up of a packet of reforms that i
8:59 pm
introduced last week which i am calling the safety not scapegoating package which addresses the very tragedy incident that happened at pier 14. as we know there are people like donald trump and others trying to score political points affecting an entire community as a result of this tragedy. today i'm introducing a third part of this package, an ordinance that requires off duty peace office to ensure weapons in a lock box or to lock them in their trunk of the vehicle. i want to thank supervisor mar for cosponsoring this ordinance. the fact is that having guns end up in the wrong hands has been an issue for years. currently there are between
9:00 pm
270-330 million firearms in the united states. enough for every man, woman and child in this country. between 2005-2010. 1.4 million guns were reported stolen in this country. right now there is no public tracking in annual gun thefts including guns that belong to law enforcement. an audit that was done by the u.s. county general's office found that fbi and 14 reporting agencies reported more than 1,000 guns lost or stolen between september 1998-july 2002. something the gao says need
9:01 pm
reform. recently in the bay area, guns from officers, the last people you would think a gun is pulled from. we had a bureau agent here in san francisco in late june. that individual left his gun in his backpack inside the car. it was visible in plain sight. an unknown person stole that weapon, and low and behold 4 days later the shooting occurred at pier 14 and resulting in the tragedy death. last month a gun was also stolen in the backseat of the chief of police vehicle. and only 5 days later a hayward police officer had his gun stolen from his car that was parked near starbucks. we must make sure that weapons
9:02 pm
issued by the city do not fall in the wrong hands. we need to ensure that we do everything we can to protect our citizens. the ordinance that i'm introducing today will ensure that we will do better to secure guns when stored in vehicles. i actually hope that this is the beginning of a change in policy and attitude around this issue and that other bay area counties including federal and state agencies will follow suit. the second item that i have is simply an introduction of interim prohibition extension on commercial mergers and the 24th street special use district. this is simply an extension of what we have done before. i want to thank my colleagues who supported the original interim controls. and today, the mayor and i are asking for a 10-month extension to the original 45 days controls so we can complete the community process
9:03 pm
and finish drafting permanent controls for that area. >> the last item that i have is a hearing request about resulting from a very sad incident that happened in my neighborhood, one of my neighborhoods that i represent in vernal heights where i live. we had a transformer owned and operated by pg & e that exploded. it injured two residents in my neighborhood. today i'm calling for a hearing from pg & e to talk about what happened here and what we can do to prevent an incident like this from happening again. i want to know how many transformers there are not not only in vernal heights but quite frankly throughout the city. how is the infrastructure that pg & e run maintain. what is it that happened and
9:04 pm
the idea that in this day and age, in 2015, in this country, in this city, you can have that kind of explosion is pretty scary. i know that many people in my neighborhood in vernal heights but quite frankly through other parts of the city are scared and the one thing i cannot guarantee to people right now that i know we are doing everything we can to prevent this from happening again. the purpose of this hearing is to ensure that. i also want to thank the california public utilities commission which quite frankly has led the utilities including pg & e do whatever they want. i'm grateful to the c puc that they are doing a full investigation over what happened. we have to ensure the safety of our residents. the rest i submit. >> thank you, supervisor campos. supervisor cohen? >>supervisor malia cohen: submit. >> thank you.
9:05 pm
supervisor farrell. >>supervisor mark farrell: one comment today. our city provides jobs and revenue for our city and a huge contributing factor to our neighborhood. we ask a lot of our small businesses in the community for respect and paying fair wages. these businesses and their employers comply with local state and federal laws and are forced to adopt their businesses at all levels of government to continue these policies. i think we all agree when we put these policies in place we want to make sure they are followed and implemented correctly an it's time to see what effects they will have. given the time to do this right, my staff has been working and i want to thank them for their support.
9:06 pm
i'm introducing a piece of legislation to add more regulations process for employees and employers. the legislation will provide that it's empower and implement to enforce will become operated unless a new ordinance passes a different date. this 180-day rule would not apply to ordinance existing that is currently in power to remain in force. also requires that days in the enactment that issues a renotice on their website for add straighting rules and guidance. on any amendment that takes place that oolc, the same 30-day advance notice on the website would apply. these 60-30 days enforcement period will not relate to cases currently pending an will not hurt any employees at all. and will be provided by all of
9:07 pm
our policies. lastly osc required to give notice relating to their rules and guidance and requires that it encompass on the new rules and guidance. i want to thank you for the report and taking the time to get it right. this law will law to put the law of osc and employers to adopt new laws without hurting their businesses. i look forward to the discussion ahead and the rets -- rest i submit. >> that thank you. >> that concludes new business. >>supervisor london breed: please address public comment. >> city clerk: at this time the public comment will include matters that are not on the board. public comment is not
9:08 pm
allowed on those items where public comment has been satisfied as is the case items 1-18. pursuant to the rules board of orders please direct your remarks to the board and not to the audience. people needing translation, will be loud extra time. if you have a document, please inform sf govtv. >>supervisor london breed: those with disabilities may move forward and speak first. first speaker, please. >> i would like to use the overhead. my name is colette brown. i always come here concerning my son. aubrey abrakasa.
9:09 pm
he was killed by a gun. today there is no solving of his homicide. we are also with an organization called the hilly circles. -- healing circles for mothers and fathers who have lost their children to homicide. i also want to bring up the fact that the young lady killed at pier 14. mayor lee is honoring her with a placard but not other murdered victims. what about our children . i brought that item up last time. i think he owes us an apology for the mothers and fathers who lost their children. i still remember him saying we can't give dead people jobs. i was traumatized by that and i
9:10 pm
think there should be an apology for that we are out here every tuesday and thursday, mothers and myself. asking ed lee to talk to us, to give us some acknowledgment that we are out here. also we fight for other young men and mothers and fathers who have lost they are children to homicide. gave in news some said i know who killed your child, the police know who killed your child and they have names and they can name addresses. so these are the names that mayor former mayor has. thompson hannibal, paris moffat, andrew
9:11 pm
videau, jason thomas, anthony hunter. these are all people involved with killing my child. these names didn't get pulled out of a hat. chief suhr gave these to me. >> next speaker, please. >> tom gilberte. i'm going to use my wheelchair. my mother's birthday is today. and 7:00 is coming up weekly. last week we recognized two commendations the two workers. at south beach marina, we don't get that luxury. everybody is gone. there is no 10-15-year residents. even
9:12 pm
the techies can't afford it. a long term resident is important for any neighborhood. market rate apartments is like a cavity in a neighborhood. any neighborhoods, all neighborhoods in the city. in my housing plan, part 3, freeze market rate rents, reset rate rents. old focus -- folks matter. i remember when i pop my knee and instead # -- stayed in the ocean. froze my knee and these old ladies would look out of their windows between these soap commercials and they said he is still there and they gave me my first jobs when i was on my
9:13 pm
crutches. they showed me what life is relevant when it's passing you by. it's kind of me in a wheelchair. after part 5, i'm going to run out of time. i'm going to ask for myself and others, can we have more second, please. >>supervisor london breed: thank you, next speaker, please. >> i'm going to start. who murdered my grandson. who killed my grandson. i'm with the san francisco unified school district for 38 years. i'm the grandmother. he was 28 years old. shot and
9:14 pm
murdered before his 22nd birthday. that quadruple homicide in january 9, 2013. we want justice for the four who were murdered january 9, 2015. we need this justice. we need to you make an arrest. there is evidences in this case. there was subject and you know who it is, but no one wants to make this arrest. it has been made, several, excuse me, we know, that the press have notified that the police department knows who murdered my grandson and the
9:15 pm
other three young men with several homicides regarding our people of color. it is evident that this is no care for the so-called african american people here in san francisco. a people who have their culture and their language stripped in effects or evidence. well, we the hebrew hebrew culture community know our history and we continue to demand that this city be held accountable for the unsolved murders. we want justice. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> i'm in a state of shock because of the horror of this board and the organizations in san francisco
9:16 pm
who are not prioritizing the murders of our african american children. here it is that mayor lee made a statement concerning katie styleey which i bless their family. i'm thankful for what they are receiving. she was somebody. what our black boys not nobody. c'mon, let's get real, why do i have to sit here for 4-5 hours. no reward is given to these boys for the murdersment we are fighting every tuesday and thursday. not one black person came from these organizations to help us every tuesday and thursday at 1:00. when i tried to find out what the meeting was today t leader of the organization shut me up. i just talked to the people outside who said it was embarrassing with the way i was treated. i went to washington d.c. and treated lie a -- like a dog by this
9:17 pm
woman named maggie scott. everyone of you are going to be persecuted. she represented hers. you are going to represent ours. you are going to represent san francisco. i just talked to ward. there want no districts. they are unified. how many more african american boys have to be killed. this woman got a plaque and everybody is talking about. our children were murdered 9 months ago. when is it going to take understanding. he knew what time it was, gave names. but did they call that her son was getting a reward? what's going on around here. i'm not playing a political game with you.
9:18 pm
>>supervisor london breed: thank you. next speaker, please. public speaker: madam president, members of the board, i waited on my hopefully temporary disabled privilege because i didn't want to come in front of these mothers because i believe they have been disabled as well. i don't believe you lose a child and remain the same.
9:19 pm
i don't think you lose a child and remain very logical. i don't know how you approach that loss in a way that you can always make everybody happy when you are hurting. so i wanted to just wait until they were finished to just say a couple of things as some of you may or may not know. i live at frederick douglas haynes garden. what's happening is real personal to me. it is of tremendous concern. but the concern is larger than frederick douglas hanes. i have said it before and if i haven't let me say it now. we live not only san francisco but all over the country. we live in a period in the country where the wealth cover the neighborhood of the poor. if we don't take action to
9:20 pm
protect them, the leaders will be there. we always welcome the wealthy. we couldn't do anything about it because we didn't have any money. they are doing what they want because they have the money. we are never going to solve it. there is an article that i will send to all of you that talks about that 8 or 9 most progressive cities in the country and how racist they are according to san francisco, seattle, wisconsin, portland. austin texas, the most progressive cities. >> thank you, next speaker. public speaker: >> thank you, president breed. my name is christopher dall and
9:21 pm
i live 14 meters from sea level here to comment on environmental impacts. compared to the congress, the factual lapses of some of you to at leaster on the side of caution with the house energy committee asserts that humans have no impact on the environment. it would be so easy and so very emotionally satisfying if karmically disasters on her directly. all i would have to do is encase her in a bubble. a bubble impervious to any change above the environment. a bubble which would trap her in her own exhaust fumes. what would be the result. in a few minutes she would pass out and in another she would lose higher brain functions such as though maybe and finally she would die.
9:22 pm
how is that for one human being's environmental impact. this wouldn't be necessary but for people to understand what we need is energy, fresh water and new trees and translated for a recent visitors, this is -- [ indiscernible ] and to >> thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please.
9:23 pm
>> not another country in the world is in the streets. it's a death sentence. very nice. like hitler sent to concentration camps. this is united states and on the street. people eating from the garbage can, drinking from the garbage can. never saw doctors. it's fascist country, united states in san francisco. god punished them.
9:24 pm
>>supervisor london breed: thank you.
9:25 pm
next speaker, please. public speaker: good evening. i know you are tired and so am i. another problem. i didn't hear a word from god. i guess i'm on the wrong wavelength. anyway, this is about legs. i never realized how many people have leg problems young and old and can't stand in an up right balancing position for long periods of time. in a study they provide ample places where people can sit and rest their sore and swollen legs. they are called parks where they can gatsd gather in parks like new york city central park. we have union square but we need scattered seating
9:26 pm
where we can sit and rest especially the homeless and those that live in one bedroom apartments. yes, they do need to be maintained, the parks and benches of course. that's part of a living society. we spend thousands of dollars providing footraces in the city but very little for rest stops. oh yeah, i know, but how about the homeless. but they need the rest too. they can't step on the sidewalk because that's illegal. i guess it still is. i don't know. thank you for listening. >> thank you, next speaker, please. public speaker: my name is
9:27 pm
marion jackson. she wanted know talk about the african american community relations board. it was established on mayor willie brown when he was in office and we would like to see that again because it actually address the crisis in the black community whether it was police or housing, the black community needs a say so in how we are treated in the community. the african american community relations board was one of the ways we addressed those issues. we also want to talk about community policing. we think community policing need to be in our communities because that's the wave of the future and it gives the community an opportunity to participate in how they are policed. we want to involve in the training of our new police officers and we
9:28 pm
want to get the community more involved in community activities. i want to thank president for letting me speak today. thank you, president breed. >> thank you, mr. jackson. next speaker, please. public speaker: good evening, my name is fred jordan. i'm the president of the san francisco african american chamber of commerce and i would imagine some of you have heard a little bit about the chamber. we've been around since 1973. this is my third term. i know that we are very as astounded about this bustling economy in the city. they say that high waters raise all votes, but it hasn't raised the votes of the black community. jobs and contracts and we do have an out migration here and i know
9:29 pm
that many of you have heard about this out migration. we are not doing anything about it. the out migration continues. it's gone from 18%, i don't care what they say about 14%. 18%. i came here in 1973 from school. i know it's down, way down. 6, 5. we need to do something about this as a body. you have probably heard about the threatened boycott of the chamber, of the black chamber. we had 62 people that came together to try to address that. they are not really hearing that much from the board. they promised a hearing. we were promised that we would get 1.5% of the wholesale tax to try to address the problem with the black community. we got nothing. there are grants all over the place, we got nothing.
9:30 pm
yoshi is our last culture. taken away. that's a business. you got nothing. i'm asking this body to please pay attention to some of our problems. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> good evening, president breed and members of the board. public speaker: i'm with founders of the nation and san francisco grady campaign. president i stand before you today standing on the heroes of our former ancestors to let you know that it feels like jim crowe in san francisco. it really does. it's very sad that we are in the state that we are in. thank you supervisor avalos about your report. that is so true and so needed.
9:31 pm
with the outward migration with the black and brown. our city and our communities are being taken over by developers and we have no opportunity and the mayor has closed it's door. today we went to the mayor's office and once again the door was shut. this really is a sad day for me because it does feel like jim crowe in san francisco. that's what it feels like. i come to speak on behalf of the lost ones. there was not a plaque given in honor of these two people. demario killed the same month as katie style us. he was the grandson. it will be 20 years next year that i will be
9:32 pm
celebrating my son's anniversary and speaking of the four homicides taken last year. we hit the streets in january. i expect the board to be sensitive to this issue that our community are hurting and suffering. i know you have done an excellent service in serving us at the conference center. friday past was a national day of remembrance. >>supervisor london breed: thank you. next speaker, please. public speaker: good evening, board of supervisors, president, and all the people who stayed in the midst of this long meeting. i know everyone
9:33 pm
is tired. my name is carlotta jackson. i'm with true foster family services agency. what i want to say to the board is that we are actually suffering from a stat of emergency. the actual violence in san francisco an we need a partnership including the mayor. what i want to say is our agency has been at this for 26 years here in san francisco and we service the poorest of the poorest families. so for example in district 10, there are multiple at least 5 hud housing complexes and the families there are babies and children who are put in positions where they are in
9:34 pm
what else can i say but poorhousing situation. the reality is that because of the economic divide, i know san francisco is a beautiful city. we all want to live here, but because of the booming of the economy, the reality is that we have families who who are white are $110,000 and the median families are $29,000. there are mother with their babies in the street. there need to be a better connection with the community and our government officials. i'm begging that you would touch your heart. >> thank you. thank you very much. next speaker, please.
9:35 pm
public speaker: my name is richard dickson. good evening, i would like to thank dr. breed for honoring dr. brown. it's an honor to be here on this day and to honor our true civil rights pioneer. i'm also deputy director of california's congress of racial equality. we participate in the martin luther king jr. parade every year. i would like to invite you all to los angeles on his birthday. i'm also on the board of inner city youth. we try to prepare young men to be responsible citizens and not suffer atrocities of being in prison, jail
9:36 pm
and not supervised by public defenders and this is the cottage industry on our youth. i'm fighting with dr. brown for our economic rights and it is a true crisis in san francisco. i'm ceo of a pharmaceutical company, the only licensed pharmaceutical company in america right here in san francisco. we tried to negotiate with the city. he spent $26 million on pharmaceuticals and not anything in the african american community. we buy a lot of the pharmaceuticals. we need your support. i'm going to be talking to all of you. we are negotiating with the san francisco general at the
9:37 pm
present time. when we come to you, i hope you give us your support. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. public speaker: good evening, supervisor breed and other supervisors. i'm really appalled at how this meeting was carried out. personally i have been here since 1:15. everybody is exhausted. supervisors are laying around. you don't want do hear us. here we are at the end. redevelopment i can't stand. they lie and they come in to destroy, take away, and i say destroy, that's what i mean. to take away our livelihood, our homes. they want to come in and build it up. we can't afford it. the majority can't do that. they say we are going to do this and that. they are lying. they are not going to do it. when you go e to washington d.c. to talk to hud ks you let them know that
9:38 pm
the hud representative in san francisco are lying to us too. they are trying to take our homes. they want to take our homes and take it back to the city and the county of san francisco. it's wrong. it's a process they go through to get it back in their hands so you will control everything. ed lee, i'm not going to teacher's -- call him the mayor anymore, he's not my mayor. he didn't come to our classes. he's not my mayor. i will not vote for him again. these on board with the redevelopment and the developers from out of town, china, new york city and wherever they come from to take over our community. the black community, the black porter, we are going to do everything we can to stop them. we are not going to support them and that's the way we feel in the black community. please, if you will stop giving this redevelopment
9:39 pm
all this lead way. you know what you are doing. you can talking to them behind closed doors, there is money moving around but we are not being benefited by it. we can't get this in our community. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> good evening, madam -- public speaker: my name is turner at the baptist church. as we know the san francisco is challenged with rent which is skyrocketing. apartments are held like the garden which was developed specifically for these families displaced during the urban renewal. those apartments must be preserved. the petition to support the board of supervisors and also
9:40 pm
mayor ed lee to ensure the commissioners are fired and returned to the baptist church. the board of supervisors need to prevent them from selling this as additional property. additionally we request the board of supervisors, mayor ed lee and hud to work with baptist to assure that hanes garden remains affordable and to help renovate this complex as well. our prayer is that this city of saint francis recognize that this is an opportunity to lead and influence the nation regarding this request. lastly we request a meeting with the mayor to work on these departments together we need to hear his
9:41 pm
plan in preserving and rebuilding in diversifying. if he's listening, we need a meeting. we need a vision to restore and rebuild affordable housing. lastly we invite you to join us to hear dr. hanes as we are in revival tonight. >>supervisor london breed: thank you very much. next speaker. public speaker: i know how we live in a society where there is all kind of possibilities of how the fine points are affected on the housing outcome. for example i know when we try to control crime in the tenderloin, i know the possibility exist it may create stress in the other neighborhoods in the bay area.
9:42 pm
we are seeing some effects for something that is like an economy. part of that economy is a very low interest and causing our unstable economy. if i'm the first one to say, to be yelling at janet, damn it, janet. i will do it. one other thing i heard today which is a little bit inaccurate. someone said our garbage collection is the best system in the world. it's certainly a misstatement. we have a high resource consumption level concerning the rest of the world. when we are considering our garbage, we are basically flat on the amount of garbage we producing and the recycling
9:43 pm
process itself creates a lot of pollution and again rates a lot of energy consumption. we are no where near having the system that is the answer, that you know that's all i got. >>supervisor london breed: thank you, next speaker, please. >> president breed, members of board. i was listening to the alex jones show and he was interesting congressman walter jones who i pray will be the next speaker of the house. and i literally went door knocking around my neighborhood and told people to tune your radio i was hoping he was going to interview walter joevenlts but sealed up for reasons of
9:44 pm
so-called national security. there is nothing in there about national security. if you want to know about what national security means, study jessie ventura who studied jfk assassination. he knows what he's talking about. all fingers point to the prince in saudi arabia which is quarterbacking that. and he removes his kings that walter jones be the next speaker of the house. jesus was the speaker of the house in the temple and he sfed anyone man -- let him come to me and drink. he that believe in me shall flow. in other words jesus had to die
9:45 pm
on the cross for our sins and raised from the dead in order for the spirit to be poured out. god can only have mercy on the death. jesus pointed it time and time in the scripture. it shall be that day that living water shall go from jerusalem half from sea. >>supervisor london breed: thank you. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. madam clerk can you please read the item for adoptions without reference to committee. city clerk: item 55, approval of a 60-day extension for planning commission review on all ordinance.
9:46 pm
>>clerk, please call the roll. city clerk: supervisor tang, supervisor mar, supervisor wiener, aye, supervisor yee, aye, supervisor avalos, aye, supervisor breed, aye, supervisor campos, supervisor christensen, aye, supervisor cohen, aye, supervisor farrell. there are 10 ayes. >>supervisor london breed: the resolution is adopted unanimously. mad clerk will be read in memoriams. city clerk: at the request of president breed for miss stacy michelle dawson. >>supervisor london breed: okay, this brings us to the end of our agenda, madam clerk is there any further business before us? city clerk: that concludes the
9:47 pm
business of the day. >>supervisor london breed: thank you very much. we are adjourned. [ meeting is adjourned ] >> >>
9:48 pm
9:49 pm
9:50 pm
9:51 pm
9:52 pm
9:53 pm
9:54 pm
9:55 pm
9:56 pm
9:57 pm
9:58 pm
9:59 pm
10:00 pm
>> good afternoon, i would like to call to order the regular meeting of the san francisco public utilities commission. today's date is tuesday september 22, 2015. roll call, please. >> commissioner caen. >> here. >> vice-president vaoet tore, chasing ner courtney, commissioner kwon, mission xher moran, and we

37 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on